[Senate Hearing 108-168]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 10, 2003
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 1:29 p.m., in room SD-116, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Campbell, Bennett, Stevens, and Durbin.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
STATEMENT OF DR. JAMES H. BILLINGTON, LIBRARIAN OF
CONGRESS AND CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF
TRUSTEES FOR THE CENTER FOR RUSSIAN
LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
ACCOMPANIED BY:
GENERAL DONALD L. SCOTT, DEPUTY LIBRARIAN
KENNETH E. LOPEZ, DIRECTOR OF SECURITY
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL
Senator Campbell. The subcommittee will come to order.
Senator Durbin is running a little late. He will be along
in 10 or 15 minutes. But we will go ahead and start.
We meet today to hear from Dr. James Billington, the
Librarian of Congress, on the fiscal year 2004 request for the
Library of Congress. Dr. Billington is accompanied by Deputy
Librarian General Donald Scott and a team of others.
I met both of you in my office. I appreciated that
opportunity to talk to you.
The Library's request of $540 million represents an
increase of $44 million over the current year and 124
additional staff. As I understand it, the budget request can be
reduced by the amount of the funds provided in the pending
fiscal year 2003 supplemental, a total of $7.4 million. Major
increases are requested for additional security measures,
particularly new police officers, funds for the ongoing
establishment of an audiovisual conservation center in
Culpeper, Virginia, as well as routine increases in payroll and
that needed for inflation.
Other areas of emphasis in your budget, Dr. Billington, is
the alternate computing facility, which is to be operational
this summer, continuing to reduce the backlog of uncataloged
items in the Library and increasing the budget for the Veterans
History Project, to name a few.
And with that, we will go ahead and start. If you would
like to submit your complete testimony for the record, that
will be included. And if you would like to diverge from that,
that will be fine, too.
Excuse me. Before we start, I did not realize that Senator
Stevens had come in.
Senator Stevens. They were exposed to me yesterday at the
Rules Committee, Mr. Chairman. So I am here to listen again.
Senator Campbell. Okay. You have no statement, then,
Senator?
Senator Stevens. No, thank you.
Senator Campbell. Okay. Why do we not go ahead and start?
EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
Dr. Billington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you,
also, for the committee's support of the supplemental
appropriations request. If it is approved, the Library's next
budget would be decreased to $29.9 million, rather than $44
million, which would be only a 5.5 percent increase. Most of
that 5.5 percent, 79 percent, would be for mandatory pay and
price level increases.
UPCOMING CHALLENGES
The Library is, in effect, in the process of superimposing
a massive digital electronic library on what is already the
world's largest traditional library of artifacts. For fiscal
year 2004, we will face special challenges in implementing new
security measures, a police force merger, and planning to
replace the 42 percent of our current staff who will become
eligible to retire in the next 5 years; also requiring and
preparing this long-awaited, much-needed national audiovisual
conservation center, most of which is coming to us through a
very generous donation from the Packard Humanities Institute;
and finally, acquiring, preserving, and ensuring rights-
protected access to this explosion of materials that are
produced in digital format, as well as the continuing pile-up
of analog items, of which we add 10,000 a day.
The events of September 11, the constant threat of
terrorism, war in Iraq, have greatly increased the importance
of the Library's mission to gather and make accessible the
world's knowledge for the Nation's good. We serve in many ways
as the Nation's strategic information reserve. And we provide
Congress with authentic information, principally through CRS,
the Congressional Research Service, and the Law Library. Last
year, CRS experts delivered over 800,000 responses to a wide
variety of Congressional inquiries.
The unique global resources also play a special role. One
of our Middle Eastern experts discovered and translated not so
long ago a rare 1991 autobiography written by Osama bin Laden,
which named some of his cohorts. The report was made available
to the Congress and the Government agencies and is now
available for research in our African and Middle Eastern
reading room.
Another example, our Law Library, which has the largest
collection of Afghanistan laws in the world, helped reassemble
that country's laws, most of which were destroyed by the
Taliban. The Law Library found a unique two-volume set of the
laws that was unavailable elsewhere, reconstructed it. It has
been distributed to 1,000 institutions in Afghanistan.
The final example of this kind is our Federal Research
Division, which did a study on terrorism in 1999. It was
commissioned by the National Intelligence Council. And 2 years
before 9/11, the study noted that members of al Qaeda could
conceivably crash an aircraft into the Pentagon, CIA
Headquarters, or The White House. That report is now available
on our website.
Our new national plan for digital preservation was approved
by the Congress last December. And it establishes an approach
for the capture and preservation of important websites,
including those that are dealing with issues of urgent
importance to the Congress. The average life span of a website
today, Mr. Chairman, is 44 days. So we are taking the lead on
acquiring and preserving this digital material and will be
asking eventually to adapt the mandatory deposit requirement of
the Copyright Act to the digital environment so we can more
efficiently deposit online materials.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS FUNDING PRIORITIES
Most of our requested increase, as I have said, is for
mandatory pay and price increases. The Library does not seek
support for any new functions. What we are simply doing is
getting the adequate support for the resources needed to
perform the historic service in a radically changed and
increasingly changing environment. That involves improving
physical security, support collections security and management,
including the new center at Culpeper. It involves managing our
growing collections and incorporating the rapidly changing
technology into all our operations right across the board,
supporting the Copyright Office's reengineering efforts, for
instance, and enhancing access by the Congress to CRS products
wherever and whenever the Congress needs, increased CRS
research capacity to manipulate the large data sets upon which
CRS analysts rely, and incentives to enhance staff retention.
We are requesting funding that will support 4,365 full-time
equivalent positions, which is an increase of 124 FTEs. That
number is still 184 fewer FTEs than we had in 1992 before the
explosion of the Internet, before the great growth of
collections and security measures that have been required in
recent years.
So, Mr. Chairman and Senator Stevens, to whom we continue
to be indebted in many ways in this institution, we thank you,
especially for your support in recent years, but also for the
Congress over 203 years. The Congress of the United States has
been the greatest single patron of the Library in the history
of the world. And it has created and sustained the largest
repository of human knowledge. So we are deeply grateful for
your confidence and support.
I would just point out a couple of items. This is the
strategic plan that was sent to you separately. I testified
this morning before Senator Lamar Alexander's committee on the
use of the Library's collections by teachers and students in K
through 12. There is a brochure here that may be of interest to
you, which describes all of our online facilities and how they
are being used educationally.
You also have a sample of different parts of the website.
We also did a listing recently of services that we perform for
the Congress, in addition to the ones you are familiar with in
CRS, as well as potential ones that we could activate very
rapidly should the Congress want them. So you may have already
received copies of this, but we will pass these over.
NEW WEBSITE
And finally, sir, we wanted to give you the first news of a
new website that just went up today. It is celebrating the
100th anniversary of Harley-Davidson.
Dr. Billington. Hog Heaven----
Senator Campbell. The Wright Brothers did a little
something, too, in 1903, as you remember.
Dr. Billington. This celebrates 100 years, including
images, posters, all of America's most recognized motorcycle.
And I brought three special examples from the new web
presentation, which we thought you might like to have in larger
scale.
The first is a photograph from our prints and photographs
collection of somebody with one of the early motorcycles in
1910. This one is the 1915 Harley-Davidson advertisement in
Motorcycle Illustrated. You could buy a motorcycle for $275
back in those days.
Senator Campbell. I got my oil changed the other day, and
it cost that much.
``HD'' stands for hundreds of dollars, by the way.
Dr. Billington. Finally, from the Motion Picture,
Broadcasting and Recorded Sound we have Jayne Mansfield with
her Harley in ``Miss Traffic Stopper of 1962.''
Senator Campbell. I will keep that one.
Well, thank you. Somebody must have told you how to get my
attention.
Dr. Billington. Thank you.
Senator Campbell. Did General Scott have any additional
comments for this?
General Scott. Yes, sir, I do.
Senator Campbell. All right. I have some questions I would
like to ask. But I would also like to note with interest the
former chairman, Senator Bennett, is here. And if Senator
Bennett or Senator Stevens either has a statement, why, if they
would like to proceed.
Senator Bennett. No, sir, Mr. Chairman. We are just
admiring the expert way in which you are handling----
Senator Campbell. You mean the way Dr. Billington is
handling me.
Senator Stevens. It was Harley-Davidson that the rich folk
bought. There was another one. It was called the JD, the Junior
Davis. Did you know about the Junior Davis?
Dr. Billington. Well, that looks like it will have to be
another website.
Senator Stevens. JD. They were, what, 80 horsepower?
Senator Campbell. Yes, they were small.
[The statements follow:]
Prepared Statements of James H. Billington
I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the Library of Congress
budget request for fiscal year 2004. The Congress of the United States
has created the largest repository of human knowledge in the history of
the world and has preserved the mint record of American intellectual
creativity. The Library's mission of making its resources available and
useful to the Congress and the American people and sustaining and
preserving a universal collection of knowledge and creativity for
future generations is more important than ever in today's environment.
The Library is supporting the war effort by making available to the
Congress information resources that continue to gain in importance as a
critical strategic asset as people are turning to on-line digital
resources for more and more information, and Congress and the nation
are using the Library of Congress's expanding digital resources at an
ever-increasing rate. The Library processed more than two billion
electronic transactions on our Web sites in fiscal year 2002, and that
number seems likely to exceed three billion in fiscal year 2003.
Technology has made it possible for the Library to extend its reach far
beyond the walls of its buildings in Washington to every corner of the
world.
Our founding fathers linked governance to learning, and legislation
to libraries, from the first time the Continental Congress convened--in
a room opposite a library--in Philadelphia on Monday, September 5,
1774. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution was designed to promote
``the progress of science and useful arts.'' The first joint committee
of the Congress in the new capital of Washington, D.C., was created for
its library. Congress created the world's first nationwide network of
library-based higher educational institutions in 1862 when the Morrill
Act built land grant universities--underscoring the basic Jeffersonian
belief that democracy, to be dynamic, had to be based on more people
using knowledge in more ways.
The Library of Congress is uniquely positioned to support the work
of the Congress and the creative dynamism of America in the early 21st
century. Three central features of the Library point the way.
--The Library of Congress (through its Congressional Research Service
and Law Library) provides the principal research support for
the Congress. The Library also serves the American people,
along with other institutions, as a source of knowledge
navigation for the increasingly chaotic profusion of
information and knowledge flooding the Internet.
--The Congress's Library is America's strategic reserve of the
world's knowledge and information. With more than 126 million
items in its collections, the Library is the only institution
in the world that comes anywhere close to acquiring everything
important for America (except for medicine and agriculture,
which have their own national libraries) in whatever language
and format it is produced. The Library's unique web of
international exchanges, and of overseas procurement offices
(Islamabad, Cairo, Jakarta, New Delhi, Nairobi, and Rio de
Janeiro), together with purchases and its U.S. copyright
deposits, generate an estimated inflow of 22,000 items a day,
of which we retain 10,000.
--The Congress's Library is the central hub of two important
knowledge networks: America's national network of libraries and
other repositories, and an international network of major
libraries. The Library of Congress is recognized as a leading
provider of free, high-quality content on the Internet. Just as
the Congress endorsed the Library of Congress providing other
libraries its cataloging data for print material in the early
20th century, so it has now mandated its Library in the early
21st century to create the metadata and plan for a distributed
national network for storing and making accessible digital
material.
The Library is a knowledge center for accumulating information and
helping distill it into scholarly knowledge and practical wisdom. We
are constructing a national collaborative effort, at Congress's behest,
to preserve digital materials for our national information reserve. The
Library submitted a National Digital Information Infrastructure and
Preservation Program (NDIIPP) plan to the Congress for establishing a
national network of committed partners who will collaborate in a
digital preservation architecture with defined roles and
responsibilities. The plan was approved in December 2002, and the
Library now plans to launch practical projects and research that will
develop a national preservation infrastructure. Funding for the NDIIPP
plan has already been appropriated by the Congress. Most of it will
require matching private sector contributions.
Thanks to the continuing support of the Congress, its Library is in
a position both to sustain its historical mission in the new arena of
electronic information and to make major new contributions to the
global and domestic needs of the United States in an increasingly
competitive and dangerous world. In the new networked world, the
Library must combine leadership functions that only it can perform with
catalytic activities relying on new, networked partnerships with both
other nonprofit repositories and the productive private sector. The
Library will need the staff, the structures, and the focus to perform
only those roles that are central to its mission and which it is
uniquely equipped to perform. To do so the Library must sustain most of
its present operations but at the same time face three major changes
that will reach across all aspects of the Library in the next decade.
--The Library's marvelous workforce must to a large extent be
retrained or renewed. Facing a disproportionately large number
of experienced personnel at or nearing retirement age, we must
create a workforce that will in the aggregate provide an even
greater diversity of both backgrounds and technical skills. The
staff for the 21st century must include highly skilled and
well-trained experts in both new technologies and the
traditional scholarly and substantive subjects required by the
richness and variety of the collections. This personnel need
is, in many ways, the most important single requirement the
Library will face in the next decade.
--The Library will have to create new structures, both technical and
human, of sufficient flexibility to enable the Library to deal
with the fast-moving ever-changing electronic universe, and to
integrate digital materials seamlessly into the massive analog
collections of the Library. These structures must be set up in
such a way that they can work effectively in an increasingly
distributed and networked environment, and simultaneously
guarantee fast and full global coverage for the Congress. The
Library has been largely able to provide information in the
analog universe; but it may have to share this responsibility
with others in the digital network if they can guarantee quick
responses to Congressional and CRS requests.
--The Library must concentrate more of its overall energies and
talents on developing the deep substantive scholarly expertise
that will enable the staff to navigate, authenticate, and
analyze knowledge for the Congress and the nation. It will be
important in the future not only to provide access to the
Library's collections, but to extend and deepen the objective
guidance that both the Congress and the scholarly world will
need in confronting the inundation of unfiltered electronic
information.
For fiscal year 2004, the Library continues to face daunting
challenges in: (1) implementing security measures and a police force
merger; (2) acquiring, preserving, and storing--and ensuring rights-
protected access to--the proliferating materials that are produced in
both analog and digital formats; (3) planning to replace the 42 percent
of our current staff who will become eligible to retire between now and
the end of fiscal year 2008; and (4) changing the Library's operations
by incorporating constantly evolving methods for communicating
information.
The Library's budget request is driven primarily by our mission to
acquire, process, make accessible, and store some three million new
artifactual items annually, while at the same time harvesting the
exponential growth of electronic materials. Additional fiscal year 2004
budget resources are needed mainly for managing our growing
collections, incorporating rapidly changing technology into our
operations, and covering mandatory pay raises and unavoidable price
increases. The Library seeks support in its fiscal year 2004 budget
request not for any new functions, but simply for the resources needed
to perform our historic service in a radically changing environment.
To meet these challenges, the Library requests additional fiscal
year 2004 budget funds to improve physical security and support
collections security and management (including the construction of the
National Audio-Visual Conservation Center at Culpeper, Va.); to support
the Copyright Office's reengineering efforts; and to enhance access to
Congressional Research Service (CRS) products and increase CRS research
capacity in critical areas.
For fiscal year 2004, the Library of Congress requests a total
budget of $576.6 million ($540.1 million in net appropriations and
$36.5 million in authority to use receipts), a net increase of $44.5
million above the fiscal year 2003 level. The requested increase
includes $23.6 million for mandatory pay and price-level increases, and
$48.3 million for program increases, offset by $27.4 million for
nonrecurring costs. The Library's fiscal year 2004 budget request is a
net increase of 8.4 percent above fiscal year 2003.
Requested funding will support 4,365 full-time-equivalent (FTE)
positions, an increase of 124 FTEs over the fiscal year 2003 target of
4,241. The Library is assuming staffing at the fiscal year 2003 target
level and requesting the additional FTEs largely to implement security
standards and to support the Library's massive artifactual collections.
The fiscal year 2004 budget increase is needed to fund the
following major initiatives (which I will address in detail later in
this statement):
--Physical Security ($17.5 million and 62 FTEs).--Additional police
are required to staff new posts and implement Capitol Hill
security standards. Funding is also required to implement the
new alternative computer facility, a new public address system,
and enhanced emergency preparedness procedures.
--Collections Security and Management ($14.1 million and 30 FTEs).--
The National Audio-Visual Conservation Center (NAVCC) at
Culpeper, Va., will enable the Library to redress significant
limitations in its ability to store, secure, preserve, and
provide access to more than 900,000 films and 2.6 million audio
materials. The NAVCC will be constructed in two phases: in
2004, storage building and infrastructure; and in 2005,
processing building and nitrate storage. Additional NAVCC
funding of $11.1 million and 8 FTEs is required in fiscal year
2004 to maintain the construction schedule. It is essential to
demonstrate this level of public support if we are to secure
the unprecedentedly large private-sector support that we expect
to receive when this facility is conveyed to the U.S.
Government. The Library also requires $3 million and 22
temporary FTEs to improve the collections security and
management of its other vast collections, including reducing
the arrearage of unprocessed items.
--Copyright Office ($7.8 million).--Funding is required to restore
the one-time $5.7 million fiscal year 2003 base reduction
resulting from the availability of fiscal year 2002
supplemental no-year funding, and $2.1 million is required to
support the ongoing reengineering project.
--Congressional Research Service ($2.7 million).--The Congress must
have uninterrupted access to the policy expertise and
information resources needed to address key public policy
issues. CRS is requesting additional resources to ensure
continuity of business operations, to enhance capacity for
database management, and to reform workforce practices that add
incentives to encourage staff retention, which in turn will
enhance the quality, access, and timeliness of its
Congressional research and information services.
--Other Core Programs and Mandated Projects ($6.2 million and 28
FTEs).--Several of the Library's core programs require
additional resources, including the mass deacidification
program, the Integrated Library System, the Law Library
acquisitions program, the talking books program, the Office of
Inspector General, and the Library's space management program.
In addition, several congressionally mandated programs require
the resources adequate to accomplish their assigned missions:
the Veterans History Project; the Meeting of Frontiers program,
the National Film Preservation Foundation, and the retail sales
program.
Concurrent with the submission of this budget request, the Library
has submitted an fiscal year 2003 supplemental appropriations request
of $7.4 million for two physical security items that are included in
our fiscal year 2004 physical security budget request of $17.5 million.
If approved, the two items would immediately support our emergency
management program and alternative computer facility, and the Library's
fiscal year 2004 budget request could be reduced by $7.4 million.
THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS TODAY
The core of the Library is its incomparable collections and the
specialists who interpret and share them. The Library's 126 million
items include almost all languages and media through which knowledge
and creativity are preserved and communicated.
The Library has more than 28 million items in its print
collections, including 5,706 volumes printed before the year 1500; 12.3
million photographs; 4.9 million maps; 2.6 million audio recordings;
900,000 motion pictures, including the earliest movies ever made; 5.1
million pieces of music; and 56.1 million pages of personal papers and
manuscripts, including those of 23 U.S. Presidents, as well as hundreds
of thousands of scientific and government documents.
New treasures are added each year. Notable acquisitions during
fiscal year 2002 include: one of the earliest maps to identify the
United States as an independent country (Carte des Etats De L'Amerique
Suivant le Traite de paix de 1783, Dediee et presentee a s. Excellence
Mr. Benjamin Franklin), with extensive marginal text reporting the
military events of the American Revolution; the comprehensive papers of
Jackie Robinson, including more than 7,000 items on all aspects of his
life; 26 rare Afghan monographs smuggled out of Afghanistan during the
Taliban era; 67 North Korean movies and additional North Korean videos;
and the Prelinger Collection of more than 48,000 historical motion
pictures, which brings together a variety of American ephemeral
advertising, educational, industrial, amateur, and documentary films of
everyday life, culture, and industry in 20th century America.
Every workday, the Library's staff adds more than 10,000 new items
to the collections after organizing and cataloging them. The staff then
shares them with the Congress and the nation--by assisting users in the
Library's reading rooms, by providing on-line access across the nation
to many items, and by featuring the Library's collections in cultural
programs.
Every year the Library delivers more than 800,000 research
responses and services to the Congress, registers more than 520,000
copyright claims, and circulates more than 23 million audio and braille
books and magazines free of charge to blind and physically handicapped
individuals all across America. The Library annually catalogs more than
300,000 books and serials, providing its bibliographic records
inexpensively to the nation's libraries, thus saving them millions of
dollars annually.
The Library also provides Congressional offices, federal agencies,
libraries, and the public with free on-line access, via the Internet,
to its automated information files, which contain more than 75 million
records. The Library's Internet-based systems include major World Wide
Web services (e.g., Legislative Information System, THOMAS,
, , Global Legal Information
Network, the Library of Congress On-line Public Access Catalog
[], and various file transfer options).
FISCAL YEAR 2002 ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Fiscal year 2002 was an exciting year for the Library of Congress.
Major achievements include the completion of the congressionally
mandated National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation
Program plan; the addition of 14 new multimedia historical collections
to the American Memory Web site, increasing to more than 7.8 million
the number of items freely available on-line; responding to the
September 11th terrorist attack and subsequent anthrax incidents by
providing focused research support for the Congress on terrorism and
homeland security and by acquiring and preserving historically
significant items for a worldwide record of the events and their
aftermath; improving the security of the Library's people, collections,
and buildings; reducing the Library's arrearage of uncataloged
collections by more than one million items; and recording more than 2
billion electronic transactions on the Library's Internet Web sites.
PHYSICAL SECURITY
The Library is requesting a $17.5 million and 62-FTE increase to
support improved security of the Library's people, collections, and
buildings. Components of the increase are:
--Police Staffing.--The Library is requesting $4.8 million and 54
FTEs as the first increment of increasing the Library's police
force by 108 FTEs, including four support personnel. The
increase in police staffing cannot wait until the merger with
the Capitol Police is completed. Enhanced security and new
posts require more police to ensure that all building entrances
are staffed at the standard level, that new and enhanced
exterior posts are staffed, and that overtime is not excessive.
--Alternative Computer Facility (ACF).--The Library is requesting
$2,759,000 and 2 FTEs for ongoing operational costs of the ACF,
including hardware and software maintenance and networking and
telecommunications costs. In addition, $1,863,000 is required
for CRS to implement its portion of the ACF, including the
purchase of hardware, software, and contract staff to plan,
design, and establish data linkages with the Library's Capitol
Hill computer center and to reprogram its request tracking
system. The Library's computer operations remain vulnerable to
a Capitol Hill disaster until the ACF is brought on-line.
--Public Address System.--To provide effective communications for all
emergency situations, the Library is requesting $5.5 million to
implement a public address system for its three Capitol Hill
buildings and for the special facilities center. The current
inadequate public address system is built into the existing
fire alarm system, maintained by the Architect of the Capitol
(AOC). While improvements to the fire alarm system are being
considered; by 2007, the proposed upgrades would not meet the
Library's current operational requirements. These include:
communicating effectively in emergency and non-emergency
situations; reaching all areas throughout the Library
buildings; providing accurate and timely information; advising
staff appropriately to mitigate risk and potential loss of
life; and evacuating buildings expeditiously and in an orderly
manner. To protect its staff and visitors in today's uncertain
environment, the Library needs these improvements now.
--Security Enhancement Plan Additional Requirements.--The Capitol
Hill security enhancement implementation plan approved by the
Congress in 1999 called for the consolidation of the Library's
two police command centers, the installation of a new intrusion
detection system, and improved police communications. The
Library is requesting $2.1 million and one FTE to meet
additional requirements associated with these tasks, including
$1 million for additional card readers and door alarms.
--Emergency Management.--The Library is requesting $511,000 and 5
FTEs to establish an Office of Emergency Management and create
a medical emergency coordinator position. The part-time
collateral duty for the Library's existing staff who perform
emergency management responsibilities is inadequate for today's
challenges. The office would coordinate emergency planning,
training, and operations (response and recovery). The medical
emergency coordinator would provide research, analysis, and
interpretation of medical issues. Funding the Library's
security request will enhance the Library's ability to protect
its priceless staff and collections and lessen the
vulnerability of the entire Capitol Hill complex by making the
Library's security more compatible with that of the complex as
a whole.
COLLECTIONS SECURITY AND MANAGEMENT
A total of $14.1 million and 30 FTEs is requested for the
preservation, security, and management of the Library's collections.
Funding is requested for the following:
--$11 million for the National Audio-Visual Conservation Center.--The
National Audio-Visual Conservation Center (NAVCC) located in
Culpeper, Va., will be a world-class, state-of-the-art
conservation center that will, for the first time, consolidate
and integrate the Library's Motion Picture, Broadcasting,
Recorded Sound Division (MBRS) administrative, acquisitions,
processing, storage, preservation, laboratory transfer, and
reformatting activities in one central facility. Audiovisual
materials contain an ever-increasing percentage of the
historical record. Principally funded by what will be the
largest private gift in the history of the Library, it is
essential at this stage to demonstrate Congressional sustaining
support for this largely privately funded public resource. The
NAVCC will enable the Library to redress significant
limitations in its current ability to store, preserve and
provide access to its moving image and recorded sound
collections in the following ways:
--Collections Storage.--The Library's moving image and sound
collections are currently housed in storage facilities in
four states and the District of Columbia. When the NAVCC is
opened, the Library for the first time will be able to
consolidate all its collections in a single, centralized
storage facility that provides space sufficient to house
projected collections growth for 25 years beyond the NAVCC
move-in date.
--Preservation Reformatting.--The NAVCC Film and Sound & Video
Preservation Laboratories are being designed to increase
significantly the number of items preserved for all types
of audiovisual formats. Without the NAVCC, the Library's
current preservation rate would result in the preservation
of only 5 percent of its total endangered sound and video
materials by the year 2015. By contrast, we project that
the new NAVCC laboratories will enable us to preserve more
than 50 percent of these endangered collections in the same
10-year period after move-in.
--Digital Repository and Access.--The NAVCC will also include a
Digital Audio-Visual Preservation System that will preserve
and provide research access to both newly acquired born-
digital content, as well as analog legacy formats. This new
system is contributing to the Library's overall development
of a digital content repository and uses a new paradigm of
producing and managing computer-based digital data.
The bulk of the $11 million fiscal year 2004 NAVCC budget request
is for collections storage shelving. This includes $3.6 million
for high-density mobile shelving that will be used to fill the
large vault rooms in the main collections building and $4.1
million for special shelving to outfit the more than 120
smaller vaults that will be separately constructed and
dedicated to the storage of nitrate motion picture film. The
shelving will maximize storage capacity for the many moving
image and recorded sound formats held by the MBRS Division. The
fiscal year 2004 request also includes $1 million for
telecommunications equipment and cabling; $1,285,000 and 6 FTEs
for digital preservation; $694,000 for security equipment; and
$240,000 and 2 FTEs for administrative support. Collections
shelving, security equipment, and telecommunications cabling
and equipment (regular Library operational costs) are required
to maintain the schedule for implementing this critical
facility, which will ultimately hold more than 900,000 films
and 2.6 million audio materials. The facility will be
constructed in two phases: in 2004, non-nitrate storage
building; in 2005, processing building and nitrate storage.
Funding this year is critical to meeting this construction
schedule as well as helping to finalize the private-sector
investment in this facility, which is estimated to exceed $120
million. The AOC contribution of $16.5 million for the
acquisition of the facility has already been appropriated, but
the AOC requires $1.3 million in additional fiscal year 2004
resources for operations and maintenance of the facility.
--$1,900,000 to secure the collections by improved inventory
management.--The Library's collections security plan requires
tracking incoming materials using the Library of Congress
Integrated Library System (LC ILS). The Library has embarked
upon a multiyear program to enhance the accountability of
collections serials and several special-format collections.
Additional contract resources are requested to check in serial
issues as they are received, create item records for serials as
individual issues are bound, barcode and link each self-
contained serial volume and incoming non-rare monographs, and
convert 10,000 Japanese, Chinese, and Korean serial titles from
manual files to the LC ILS. Using the LC ILS, the Library also
proposes to use contract resources to: establish on-line
records for 2,500 American Folklife Center ethnographic
collections; achieve effective tracking, circulation, and
inventory control for the 850,000 items in the collections of
the Rare Book and Special Collections Division; and prepare
holdings records for nearly 250,000 manuscript boxes in the
Manuscript Division.
--$1,157,000 and 22 FTEs to reduce the Acquisitions Directorate
arrearage.--The Library has not received a sizable infusion of
new staff to help meet its obligation to reduce the arrearage
for more than a decade. The current level of staffing will not
permit the Library to meet the congressionally mandated
arrearage reduction goals for fiscal year 2004 and beyond. The
Library is asking for a three-year extension in meeting its
non-rare print and non-print arrearage targets, along with the
temporary staff needed to meet the targets within the revised
time frame.
COPYRIGHT OFFICE
The Library's Copyright Office promotes creativity and effective
copyright protection, annually processing more than 520,000 claims.
Each year, the office transfers about 900,000 works, with an estimated
value of more than $30 million, to the permanent collections of the
Library. The office also records more than 10,000 documents referring
to approximately 250,000 titles and responds to more than 360,000
requests for information a year.
In fiscal year 2002, the Copyright Office was provided $7.5 million
in supplemental appropriations to cover potential receipt shortfalls
due to the disruption of U.S. mail delivery following the anthrax
incidents. Once all the mail was processed, at the end of fiscal year
2002, $5.6 million of the supplemental appropriations remained
available and was subsequently used to offset the fiscal year 2003
appropriation, requiring the Copyright Office to use its remaining no-
year funds for basic operations in fiscal year 2003. For fiscal year
2004, restoration of the funds is needed to support the Copyright
Office's operations. The Library also requests $2.1 million to keep the
Copyright Office's re-engineering project on schedule, which is
critical to meeting its mission in the digital age. The Copyright
Office must replace outdated information systems that have evolved over
the past 20 years with modern technology that promotes the use of
electronically received applications and works. The Register of
Copyrights will provide more details about this critical project in her
statement.
CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE
As a pooled resource of nonpartisan analysis and information, CRS
is a valuable and cost-effective asset to the Congress. To carry out
its mission, CRS staff provide a wide range of analytic and research
services, including close support to the Members and committees
throughout the legislative process by interdisciplinary research, which
includes reports and consultations, analyses of alternative legislative
proposals and their impacts, assistance with hearings and other phases
of the legislative and oversight processes, and analysis of emerging
issues and trend data.
In addition to funding for the CRS portion of the ACF, CRS is
requesting additional resources in three areas: (1) $1,460,000 to
develop technical solutions that ensure that the Service's materials
are available to the Congress whenever and wherever they may be
required; (2) $759,000 to add specialized technical capacity for
database management activities; and (3) $535,000 for incentives that
encourage staff retention. The resources respond to the Congressional
mandate and will enhance CRS effectiveness and efficiency through
improved business processes and updated workforce policies. The CRS
Director will provide more details of the request in his statement.
OTHER CORE PROGRAMS AND MANDATED PROJECTS
The Library is requesting a total increase of $5.2 million and 28
FTEs for core programs and projects and for congressionally mandated
projects. Components of the increase are:
Core Programs
Mass Deacidification.--The Library requests $919,000 to support the
fourth of five increments required in our 30-year (one generation) mass
deacidification program. The Congress approved the first three
increments of this critical preservation program, and the Library
requests a planned increase of $919,000 to continue to scale up to $5.7
million by fiscal year 2005. By 2005, the Library plans to have reached
the capacity to deacidify 300,000 books and 1,000,000 manuscripts
annually.
Law Library Purchase of Materials.--The Library is requesting
$360,000 to increase the fiscal year 2003 budget of $1.5 million for
purchasing law materials above the normal inflationary increase. The
current base is not sufficient to acquire a comprehensive collection to
support the Congress, and as a result, the Law Library is no longer
able to respond quickly to key Congressional questions on issues such
as anti-terrorism, foreign taxation, international criminal court, etc.
Library of Congress Integrated Library System.--The Library is
requesting a total fiscal year 2004 budget of $1,289,000 for the LC
ILS, an increase of $384,000. The increase would support implementation
of this mission-critical system for collections control and security,
including additional bar code scanners and printers.
Space Moves.--The Library is requesting $1.3 million for contract
services to expand our capacity to handle space moves within the
Library's three Capitol Hill buildings. As the Library re-engineers its
business processes, additional capacity is required to make space
changes to facilitate the new work flows. This additional capacity
would enable the Library to avoid serious delays in the implementation
of space improvements, which reduce the effectiveness and efficiency of
operations.
Inspector General Computer Security Audits.--The Office of the
Inspector General (OIG) is requesting an increase of $200,000 and 2
FTEs to ensure that agency-wide and system-level information technology
security reviews covering operational and technical controls, policy,
and management are performed. The new auditors are required to address
the Library's longstanding weaknesses in information technology
security.
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Veterans History Project (VHP).--In fiscal year 2003, the Congress
approved $476,000 and 6 FTEs for this massive project. The overwhelming
nationwide reaction to this popular program has exceeded our
expectations, and the Library requests an additional $579,000 and 7
FTEs to respond to the demands of this mandated program for interviews
of a potential veteran population of 18 million.
Meeting of Frontiers.--In fiscal year 1999, the Congress
appropriated $2 million to digitize and place on-line materials from
both Russia and United States to tell the story of the American
exploration and settlement of the West, the parallel Russian
exploration and settlement of Siberia and the Far East, and the meeting
of the Russian-American frontier in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest.
To date, the Web site for the project includes about 100,000 images.
The Library is requesting $375,000 and 3 FTEs to continue the project
in fiscal year 2004, including digitizing more items and continuing and
promoting the educational use of the materials in both countries.
National Film Preservation Foundation.--Authorization for the
National Film Preservation Board and the National Film Preservation
Foundation expires on October 11, 2003. As part of the reauthorization
legislation for the film foundation, the Library is seeking to increase
the government's matching contributions from $250,000 to $500,000. The
film foundation has a proven track record of preserving our film
heritage through matching private-sector grants, which is a cost-
effective way to address this critical need. The foundation has
supported a large number of small preservation centers all across
America.
Retail Sales Programs.--The Library requests $715,000 and 5 FTEs to
provide capital for the retail sales program, including the Sales Shop
and the Photoduplication Service. The added funding would support
additional e-commerce and marketing efforts designed to generate
profits from the Library's retail sales program, which would be used to
benefit the Library's core programs. Without an initial infusion of
capital, the Library will be able to implement only incremental
improvements toward making these programs into profit centers that can
support other Library activities.
NATIONAL LIBRARY SERVICE FOR THE BLIND AND PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED
The Library administers a free national library program of braille
and recorded materials for blind and physically handicapped persons
through its National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
Handicapped (NLS). Under a special provision of the U.S. copyright law
and with the permission of authors and publishers of works not covered
by the provision, NLS selects and produces full-length books and
magazines in braille and on recorded disc and cassette. The Library
distributes reading materials to a cooperating network of regional and
subregional (local, nonfederal) libraries, where they are circulated to
eligible borrowers. Reading materials and playback machines are sent to
borrowers and returned to libraries by postage-free mail. Established
by an act of Congress in 1931 to serve blind adults, the NLS program
was expanded in 1952 to include children, in 1962 to provide music
materials, and in 1966 to include individuals with other physical
impairments that prevent the reading of standard print.
The fiscal year 2004 budget maintains program services by funding
mandatory pay and price-level increases totaling $1,068,000 and
restores a $1 million one-time base reduction for purchase of talking
book machines, which is offset by a $1 million decrease for a one-time
payment to the National Federation of the Blind. Restoring the one-time
base cut and funding the fiscal year 2004 increase is necessary to
ensure that all eligible individuals are provided appropriate reading
materials and to maintain a level of sound reproduction machines able
to satisfy basic users' requirements without delays. The budget
continues to support the exploration of alternative digital
technologies, which will ultimately lead to a new delivery system to
replace the current analog cassette tape technology.
LIBRARY BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS
The AOC is responsible for the structural and mechanical care and
maintenance of the Library's buildings and grounds. In coordination
with the Library, the AOC has requested a fiscal year 2004 budget of
$47.1 million, an increase of $9.8 million. The AOC budget includes
funding totaling $4.2 million in appropriations for four projects that
were requested by the Library.
As mentioned earlier in this statement, the National Audio-Visual
Conservation Center in Culpeper, Va., is being constructed, and the AOC
requires operations and maintenance funding of $1,263,000 during fiscal
year 2004 to support this critical project. Assurance of the government
support is critical in leveraging the far larger amount (which has now
increased to well over 75 percent of the total) that we are raising
privately for this project.
The three other Library-requested projects support the security of
the Library's collections, the design of a logistics warehouse at Fort
Meade, Maryland, and space modifications in the James Madison Building.
Library-requested projects are prioritized based on critical need and
in accordance with both the security needs and the strategic plan of
the Library. I urge the committee to support the Architect's Library
Buildings and Grounds budget, which is critical to the Library's
mission.
AUTOMATED HIRING SYSTEM
Fiscal year 2002 was the first full year of operation for a new
hiring process that was implemented to resolve outstanding motions
pending in the Federal District Court related to the Library's hiring
and selection procedures for professional, administrative, and
supervisory technical positions. As I reported last year, the Library
encountered implementation problems associated with the new hiring
process, including a new automated hiring system. I am pleased to
report that significant progress has been made. Managers made 300
professional, administrative, and supervisory technical competitive
selections in fiscal year 2002 using the new process. This compares
favorably with 187 such selections during fiscal year 2001 and a five-
year average of 190 positions during the period of fiscal year 1996-
2000. The new process is content-valid (i.e., a strong linkage exists
among job requirements, application questions, and interview questions
developed by subject matter experts), and the new process enables the
Library to reach a wider applicant pool because of its on-line
capabilities.
We are absolutely committed to a fair hiring system that meets both
competitive selection requirements and timeliness goals.
FEDLINK PROGRAM
The Library's FEDLINK revolving fund program coordinates services
and programs on behalf of federal libraries and information centers,
including the purchase of library materials. The Faxon Company, a
FEDLINK vendor that provides subscriptions to participating libraries,
filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on January 27, 2002. As part
of the bankruptcy case, the Library has established a claim of
approximately $2.5 million for unfilled orders for FEDLINK libraries.
Faxon and its bankrupt parent company, RoweCom, Inc., intend to
submit a reorganization plan that calls for the purchase of their
operations by EBSCO Industries and the resumption of service to
libraries. At the time of the preparation of this statement, the
ultimate liability for the Library or the FEDLINK revolving fund
customers is unknown, but the Library believes a substantial portion of
the orders will be filled and the claim thereby satisfied. The Library
will continue to update the committee on the status of this issue and
any potential need for a deficiency supplemental for the FEDLINK
revolving fund.
SUMMARY
The Library of Congress is in a critical period when it must, in
effect, superimpose a select library of digital materials onto its
traditional artifactual library if it is to continue to be a responsive
and dynamic force for the Congress and the nation. We are not seeking
appropriations for any new functions, but rather trying to sustain our
historic core function of acquiring, preserving, and making accessible
knowledge and information that is now being generated and communicated
in a radically new, and particularly impermanent medium.
Technology change and the growth of our collections will continue
to drive our budget plans. The Congress deserves great credit for
supporting all the work that the Library of Congress is doing to
preserve and make accessible the nation's creative heritage and the
world's knowledge. Consistently for 203 years, on a bipartisan basis,
our national legislature has been the greatest single patron of a
library in the history of the world. As the keeper of America's--and
much of the world's--creative and intellectual achievements, the
Library of Congress is keenly aware of the awesome responsibility it
has been given as we embrace the wonders and opportunities of the
digital age.
With Congressional support of our fiscal year 2004 budget, the
Library of Congress will continue its dedicated service to the work of
the Congress and to the creative life of the American people.
On behalf of the Library and all its staff, I thank the Committee
for its support, and look forward to working for and with the Congress
to acquire and transmit knowledge for America.
______
Center for Russian Leadership Development
Chairman Campbell, Senator Durbin and Members of the Subcommittee:
The Open World Russian Leadership Program began as a pilot exchange
program in the Library of Congress in 1999 (Public Law 106-31). The
Open World Program is now conducted by an independent legislative
branch entity, the Center for Russian Leadership Development--soon to
be re-named the Open World Leadership Center. June 2003 marks the
beginning of the fifth year of the program, which already has 6,265
alumni (as of April 1, 2003) from all 89 political units of the Russian
Federation.
Funding for Open World in fiscal year 2003 was finalized only on
February 20, 2003, in Public Law 108-7, which also authorized a number
of significant changes. The program's scope was expanded to include the
11 remaining Freedom Support Act countries, as well as the three Baltic
states. The Center's name will change on May 15th to the Open World
Leadership Center to reflect this expanded mission. The scope of the
Russian program has also been expanded to include cultural, as well as
political, leaders. The Center's fiscal year 2004 request of $14.8
million will allow the program to continue to operate in Russia, to
maintain its efficient operations and low per capita outlay, and to
develop pilot expansion programs in two to three countries of the
former Soviet Union and the Baltics if Congress so authorizes after
Open World pilots are undertaken in fiscal year 2003.
The Center's proposed expansion pilots must be approved by this
subcommittee before being implemented. Let me outline for the members
of the subcommittee the approach we are taking toward this planning and
what we expect shortly to recommend to the Center's board and
ultimately to you. The program expansion requires a number of steps
before and after the subcommittee's approval:
--strategic assessment of U.S. foreign policy goals and objectives
for each country, as well as an assessment of past and planned
U.S. government aid;
--assessment of success factors, including the availability of
appropriate nominating and host organizations, and logistical
and language support;
--consultation with the Department of State and an assessment of the
availability of assistance from the U.S. Embassy for each new
pilot country;
--publication of grant hosting guidelines and review of submitted
proposals;
--grant awards and program implementation, including travel logistics
and visas;
--development of appropriate evaluation tools.
Once approval has been granted to proceed with expansion pilots,
implementation will take a minimum of 16 weeks. Tightened visa
regulations in almost all U.S. embassies necessitate a lead time of 12
weeks, which takes into account the possible need for in-person
interviews for a substantial number of delegates. We hope to have all
travel for this year's exchanges completed by October 2003, although
this target could change depending on when the pilots are approved. In
our Russia program, we have already brought 357 participants this year
through April 9, 2003.
Our implementation schedule will not allow the results of the
pilots to be considered by this subcommittee before action is expected
to be completed on the fiscal year 2004 budget. Because the Center's
appropriation is made to its Treasury Department trust fund, funding is
not restricted to fiscal year obligations. The Center proposes,
therefore, to maintain a reserve of $2 million to be available to fund
additional countries. A total of 1,600 participants would be brought
from the Russian Federation since the beginning of 2003; a total of 160
participants would be brought from expansion states with an evaluation
mechanism sufficient to support a decision with regard to program
continuation or further expansion. The Open World Program might serve
as a useful model for programs to accompany significant U.S. aid to
nations in support of democratic reforms and institutions. A draft
timetable and assessment chart are included as Attachments A and B,
respectively.
We are requesting $14.8 million for fiscal year 2004, an increase
of 14.8 percent over the fiscal year 2003 funding level in order to be
able to expand the fiscal year 2003 pilot programs in as many as three
new countries into more full-fledged programs. The decision on how many
and which programs will be so developed will be based on our assessment
of the successes of the pilots, and the need to maintain the hosting of
Russian civic leaders at a level comparable to previous years. The
fiscal year 2004 request is also premised on the continued and modest
growth of the Russian Cultural Leaders program, another element of
expansion mandated in the appropriations for fiscal year 2003.
2002 Program Overview and Highlights
In 2002 Open World welcomed its largest number of participants
since the program's inception--2,531--more than ten times the number of
participants in 2001, when the Center was being created as an
independent entity, and a 58 percent increase over 2000. A fact sheet
for the Open World Program is included as Attachment C, but let me
highlight elements of the 2002 program.
--The program's reach in both the Russian Federation and the United
States is broad and deep.
--We continue to find young leaders with increasingly significant
political experience behind them: 50 percent are working in
local, regional, and federal government entities; 21 percent,
in education and the media (an area exploding in both number
and diversity of outlets in Russia); 17 percent, in Russia's
still nascent NGO sector.
--Home hosting in 2002 has been sustained for 85 percent of
participants and the availability of new American host sites
continues to expand each year.
A new theme-focused recruitment effort attracted a higher-caliber
candidate and allowed host organizations and local host communities to
develop programs with greater professional benefit for participants.
This focus increased satisfaction with programs and built professional
as well as personal ties across the two countries--creating in many
cases ongoing links that expand the benefit of the 10-day intensive
training program.
Eight themes were developed in collaboration with the U.S. Embassy
in Moscow and with U.S. organizations and foundations working in
Russia: rule of law, economic development, women as leaders, health,
education reform, environment, federalism, and youth issues (including
drug, alcohol, and HIV/AIDS intervention programs). Rule of law (17
percent) and women as leaders (14 percent) were among the largest
theme-groupings.
--2002 Participants represented 47 ethnic groups and 86 of 89 regions
(total program representation now reaches 55 ethnic groups and
89 of 89 regions).
--Average age of delegates in 2002 was 38.
--The Center hosted 53 arriving groups (on unique travel dates)
comprised of 464 delegations.
--Most groups arriving in Washington, D.C., received a political and
cultural orientation at the Library of Congress.
--At the suggestion of our Board members and in recognition of the
importance of including more of the Muslim population of Russia
in Open World, we have made a significant effort to recruit
participants from such traditionally Muslim regions as Adigei,
Bashkortostan, Dagestan, Karachaevo-Cherkesskaia, and
Tatarstan, and have selectively chosen delegates from Chechnia
and Ingushetia. The proportion of Open World delegates who are
Muslim reflects the percentage of Muslims in the Russian
population, and Open World is prepared to increase its
recruitment of this population if Members of Congress and our
Board request such action.
--Women comprised 54 percent of the delegates, reflecting the
addition of the ``women as leaders'' theme in 2002.
--Participants in 2002 were hosted in 372 communities in 48 states
(including Alaska and Hawaii); overall Open World hosting has
reached all 50 states.
--Colorado hosted 113 participants; Illinois, 168; Utah, 91; Alaska,
59; South Dakota, 24.
--Eighteen host organizations received grants in 2002 (eight
organizations were first-time hosts, including the Alaska State
Legislature. This is the first elected body to serve as a
collective host. We hope to expand the model to other state
legislatures as the significance of Russia's regional
legislatures grows).
--Grant applications to host in 2003 (with only civic guidelines
posted) already total 23, with hosting capacity of over 4,200
participants--and with 10 organizations requesting to host for
the first time.
History
The Open World Russian Leadership Program was initiated as a result
of a discussion among key Members of Congress in April 1999 and
launched six weeks later with press announcements in Washington and
Moscow. The original sponsor of the legislation that created Open World
(Public Law 106-31) was Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), who now serves
as Honorary Chair of the Center's Board of Trustees. The program
continued as a pilot at the Library of Congress until December 2000,
when Congress created the independent Center for Russian Leadership
Development (Public Law 106-554) and authorized the Library of Congress
to continue housing the center and providing administrative support for
its operations.
From its inception, Open World has enjoyed strong support from
Members of Congress. Five members serve on its Board of Trustees
(Attachment D). This year 34 Members of Congress and five justices of
the Supreme Court welcomed Open World delegations, joined by 13
governors; 33 mayors of major cities; state legislators; and community
and civic leaders in 48 states. At a time when the United States has an
enhanced understanding of the value of public diplomacy, Open World
stands as the largest ``people-to-people'' exchange since the
establishment of the Fulbright-Hays Program and the Peace Corps.
The Open World Program was created in a few short weeks at a time
when U.S.-Russian relations were at a particularly difficult point
during the late spring of 1999. In the intervening years, relations
between Russia and the United States improved, particularly after the
tragic events of September 11, 2001.
Unfortunately, relations between Russia and the United States in
April 2003 are again strained, and anti-American sentiment is again
evident in Russia. The percentage of Russians holding unfavorable
opinions of the United States has risen to a level roughly equivalent
to opinion tracked during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in the spring
of 1999 (Attachment E). At that time, Congress expressed its judgment
on the importance of this country's relations with Russia by
appropriating funds for a new Russian Leadership Program--which the
Library of Congress organized. We brought 1,975 young emerging
political leaders from Russia to the United States for the first time
for brief stays to observe America's democracy and market economy
firsthand. The participants were active leaders, not scholars; they
stayed in homes, not hotels; they saw the United States with their own
eyes and made their own judgments; they immersed themselves in a single
community.
Open World participants are the leaders of a struggling but
emerging democracy in all 89 regions of Russia--not just in Moscow with
its veneer of fast food restaurants and American television and films.
Open World participants stay in, and establish often continuing links
with communities all over America--not just with New York and
Washington. Thanks to Open World, there are now hundreds of cities and
towns whose mayors, regional and city legislators, judges, prosecutors,
educators, entrepreneurs, women leaders, and NGO leaders have been
welcomed into American communities and homes. While here, these Russian
leaders have observed and discussed jury trials, health care delivery,
AIDS prevention, high school drug intervention programs, the nature of
federalism in emerging democracies, and the financing and building of
small and medium-sized businesses.
Then and Now
The Open World Program was initiated in 1999 and is even more
important today--because cementing Russia's engagement with the West is
one of the most critical continuing challenges for American foreign
policy. Russia has a geopolitical position bordering on many of the
most potentially threatening regions in the world; and it has one of
the world's largest stores of weapons of mass destruction and of
untapped natural resources. It is aggressively trying to replace a long
authoritarian tradition with a fragile democracy; and surprisingly few
of its leaders have had any experience of how an open society operates.
The State Department--with whom we consult and work closely (the
Open World Program is housed in the U.S. Embassy in Moscow) has
testified this year that Russia is now well on its way in its
transition to democratic governance and a market economy. Because
Freedom Support Act assistance to Russia is being phased out over the
next several years, in part to devote funding to Central Asia, the
State Department is looking to other assistance and exchange programs,
such as Open World, to continue to support fundamental change in
Russia. It is clearly an important priority for the United States to
engage in public diplomacy and provide increased aid to the states of
Central Asia, which have understandably received greater attention
since September 11, 2001. But the work of Russia's emerging and still
struggling generation of future leaders is not over--it has scarcely
begun. Opportunities to bring the next generation of Russian leaders--
committed to democracy and real progress--remain strong.
U.S. visits offered by the Open World Program remain the single
most important and cost-effective means of continuing a positive and
productive Russian engagement with the United States whatever the
fluctuations in our diplomatic relations. The program's home in the
Legislative Branch secures not only the involvement of Members of
Congress but a direct connection to the communities and states members
represent--communities that host Russian Open World leaders in
unprecedented numbers in American homes and that directly reflect
American values and ideals.
A closer look at three program areas will help members of the
subcommittee better appreciate its reach and impact in Russia:
Rule of Law
Since launching the Open World specialized rule of law program in
2001, the Center for Russian Leadership Development has quickly become
one of the premier organizations working to support Russian jurists as
they implement judicial reforms. In 2002, 213 Russian judges
participated in Open World's specialized program in which five Supreme
Court justices and two Supreme Commercial Court justices participated.
Each delegation was hosted for a week in the court of a prominent U.S.
federal or state judge, who planned and participated in the delegate's
intensive agenda. In 2002, 42 U.S. judges hosted their Russian
counterparts, and dozens more--including U.S. Supreme Court Chief
Justice William H. Rehnquist and Associate Justices Sandra Day
O'Connor, Anthony M. Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen G.
Breyer--played an active role in the Russian jurists' professional
programs.
Activities included observing court proceedings; shadowing American
judges; visiting corrections facilities, police departments, and law
schools; and participating in roundtables with judges and other legal
professionals. Topics covered included judicial ethics and
independence, court administration and security, case management and
trial procedures. Several delegations also used their Open World visits
to establish or strengthen sister-court relationships with their host
courts. Participants were prepared for their community visits by a two-
day orientation program in Washington, D.C., conducted by U.S. judges
and judicial staff with the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
and the Federal Judicial Center, the federal courts' research and
education arm.
U.S. federal host judges were recruited by, and in many cases
members of, the International Judicial Relations Committee of the U.S.
Judicial Conference, the federal courts' policy-making body. State host
judges were members of the Russian American Rule of Law Consortium, a
network of partnerships among the legal communities of seven Russian
regions and seven U.S. states.
Open World worked closely with the Russian Federation Council of
Judges (the policy-making body for the country's all-federal courts of
general jurisdiction) and the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian
Federation in selecting candidates for the program.
A special focus of this Open World rule of law programming in 2002
was jury-trial procedure. The jury-trial system, which was banned
throughout the Soviet era, was reinstituted on a pilot basis in the
early 1990s in nine Russian regions. The recent passage of President
Putin's judicial reform package includes the nationwide expansion of
jury trials for serious criminal cases. Judges, prosecutors, and
defense attorneys throughout Russia must now quickly become familiar
with jury procedures. In response, Open World 2002 included programming
and hands-on exposure to observe how American-style jury trials are
conducted for three delegations made up of teams of prosecuting
attorneys, defense attorneys, and judges.
Open World 2002 included a new focus on legal education. Twenty-
four deans and faculty of Russian law schools participated in visits
hosted by Cleveland State University College of Law, George Washington
University Law School, Rutgers Law School, University of the Pacific
McGeorge School of Law, University of Maine School of Law, and Vermont
Law School. Court administrators were also included in the Open World
2002 specialized rule of law programming, with one delegation
participating in a court management program hosted by the National
Center for State Courts in Arlington, Virginia, and in Portland, Oregon
(where they attended the annual meeting of the National Association of
Court Managers), and several more high-level court administrators
joined other delegations.
Women as Leaders
The women as leaders theme was a major new focus for the 2002 Open
World Program in recognition of the markedly increased role of women in
the new generation of emerging Russian leaders. Aiming to promote the
professional advancement of women in many fields, the women as leaders
program gave 361 Russian women new leadership skills, resources, and
training. The 2002 program targeted specific groups of women, including
politicians; entrepreneurs; journalists; and activists addressing human
trafficking and domestic violence. Many women were recommended by
first-time Open World nominating organizations recruited to nominate
for this new theme, such as the League of Women Voters, the Alliance of
American and Russian Women, the Association of Women Journalists, and
Russia's Ministry of Labor and Social Development.
During their U.S. visits, participants job shadowed their American
counterparts, attended leadership training seminars, met with prominent
researchers and specialists in their given fields, and visited women's
organizations and other NGOs to learn new strategies for fundraising,
membership, volunteer recruitment, and advocacy. For example, Vital
Voices Global Partnership, which works to expand women's roles in
politics, civil society, and business, conducted an effective training
program for a group of thirteen Russian women working against the
serious problem of human trafficking as researchers, counselors,
activists, and NGO and government leaders. While in the United States,
the Russian women not only learned about practical strategies to fight
trafficking, they also built new partnerships with their American
counterparts involved in this issue, as well as among themselves. The
importance of creating a support network with other anti-trafficking
advocates in Russia was summed up by one participant from a small city
in Russia's Far East, who said, ``I found out we are not alone. I'm
from so far away, but there are so many of us.''
Election 2002
The fall 2002 election cycle enabled the Open World Program to show
delegates American democracy in action as part of the program's
federalism and women as leaders themes. Delegations visited polling
stations; met with candidates, campaign officials, and journalists;
received demonstrations on voting technology; and observed candidates
campaigning. To prepare these delegations, a special presentation on
American elections and the media was given at the D.C. orientation
session.
One such delegation included a department head from the Russian
Federation Presidential Press Service and prominent women journalists.
This delegation met with the White House Communications Director,
attended a White House briefing, visited the Baltimore Sun, met with
Maryland candidates and political campaign officials and attended
election night receptions. The Alaska State Legislature hosted two
delegations of regional legislators and elections officials from the
Russian Far East for elections-related activities that included
following candidates as they campaigned door-to-door and analyzing the
election results with state legislators.
Links to Open World Alumni
Open World seeks to extend the value and significance of the brief
U.S. visit for its 6,265 alumni with continuing links to American hosts
and opportunities to meet and work collaboratively with other Open
World alumni and alumni of other U.S. government-funded exchange
programs. Open World made a commitment from its inception to track all
program participants; ours is the single largest and most current
database of such alumni in Russia. Because of the number of Open World
alumni, their distribution throughout all regions, and our ability to
locate them quickly through the database, U.S. government officials at
the embassy, consulates, Regional Initiative offices, U.S. Foreign
Commercial Service offices and other federal agencies meet and work
regularly with them. Ambassador Vershbow recently met with our alumni
in Perm and at American Corner openings in Arkhangelsk, Kaliningrad,
Saratov, and Saint Petersburg.
Open World's alumni bulletins and English-Russian website provide
the means for communication and enhanced professional opportunities.
Alumni are eager to provide Open World with topical articles and to
report on their projects. Privately-funded efforts in 2003 will expand
opportunities for training, professional development, and
communication. Particular efforts will be made to link Open World
alumni with Muskie and FLEX alumni in order to increase and multiply
the strong U.S.-Russian political and cultural ties these programs each
embody.
Alumni are also contributing to local and regional newspapers,
sharing their experiences and bringing a new perspective on America to
local readers. In several cities alumni have organized thematic
conferences upon their return to Russia. One such example was a
conference on youth policy in America held in Barnaul on International
Students' Day. Open World alumni explained how local government, the
business community, and the nonprofit sector in the United States all
work together to educate young people. Conference attendees received
lists of American organizations eager to cooperate with them on youth
issues. One of the youth leaders in Barnaul, Aleksey Ustiugov, said
that ``on Open World I was able to study all aspects of the U.S.
educational system and establish relations with youth organizations.
The program not only fosters mutual understanding, but also strengthens
trust and friendship between our nations.''
Achievements and Goals
Open World has engaged and connected American and Russian leaders
and citizens at all levels of our political system in unprecedented
numbers.
Open World has engaged Americans in more than 900 communities in
all 50 states in public diplomacy. The United States has no finer
advocates than our own citizens and community leaders who are actively
involved in the public, private, and voluntary sectors.
Opportunities to host Open World participants have expanded each
year in communities all over America. Interest in building mutual
understanding has increased. Many communities have hosted every year
since the program began and maintain strong ties to communities and
colleagues in Russia.
The effectiveness of the Open World Program has been recognized by
the Congress, which has now authorized new nation pilots beyond Russia.
Open World provides a new, cost-effective model for both
encouraging democratic development abroad and encouraging citizen
engagement in public diplomacy at home. This model can probably be
expanded to many other nations.
Open World's visitors and hosts express best the program's focus
and results:
U.S. Ambassador to Russia Alexander Vershbow
I would just like to thank Open World for giving Russians the
chance to take part in these exchanges, which in turn help them
transform the social and economic life of their regions, and this vast
country as a whole. Your program touches the lives of individuals, but
their good works in turn will affect and inspire an entire generation
of Russians.
Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
Nothing holds more promise for achieving the long-term security and
prosperity of the world community than the rule of law. Nations that
adhere to the rule of law share certain common understandings that
reach across cultural and political divides. The Open World Russian
Leadership Program plays a vital role in this dynamic process.
Judge Paul A. Magnuson, District of Minnesota
Through this demanding program, Russian judges and legal personnel
immerse themselves in the U.S. system of justice by partnering with a
leading Federal or State judge and living as part of an American
community. Besides the intensive study and knowledge gained relating to
case management, scheduling, court administration, jury selection, plea
agreements, pretrial detention procedures, the adversarial process,
etc.--there are also profound lessons learned about American society,
the esteemed position of Judges, and the principles of the rule of law.
It is clear to me, that the judges and legal professionals
participating in Open World are taking these lessons home with them and
sharing them with their colleagues, multiplying many times the
effectiveness of the Open World rule of law exchange program.
Chairman of the Council of Judges of the Russian Federation
and Supreme Court Justice Yuriy I. Sidorenko
During the course of the visits, the Russian judges were successful
in forming solid, fundamental, long-lasting, and fully productive
relationships between the Russian and American judiciaries. The
programs allowed the Russian judges to get acquainted with the system
of justice in the United States and, because of this, they were able to
further progressive legal reform in Russia. Last year's program
provided us with a special opportunity to familiarize ourselves with
the jury trial system in the United States, which, as is well known, is
once again being introduced in Russia.
Open World ``Women as Leaders'' Participant Irina Zamula,
City of Ulan Ude, Buryat Republic, Aide to Russian
State Duma Deputy
The U.S. Library of Congress Open World program is unique. The
program makes it possible to strengthen relations between our two
countries at the level of inter-personal relations, and through
contacts between ordinary citizens, who are able to see, hear and
understand one another. The many meetings--gave us a lot. But the most
important thing--they provided us the opportunity to change our
stereotypical views toward American society.
______
Prepared Statement of Marybeth Peters, The Register of Copyrights
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: Thank you for the
opportunity to present the Copyright Office fiscal year 2004 budget
request. This budget provides the resources for the Copyright Office to
continue to play a leadership role in addressing, with the Congress,
the increasingly important and complex copyright issues arising from
the expanding use of digital technology and computer networks, and to
fulfill the statutory responsibilities given the Copyright Office in
our Nation's copyright law.
In my testimony last year, I urged action on a $7.5 million
supplemental appropriation request to offset a potential loss of
receipts due to the anthrax-related disruption of U.S. Postal Service
mail delivery on Capitol Hill. I begin my testimony this year by
thanking the committee for approving that request. This funding enabled
us to maintain our basic operations and ensured that we continued to
meet public service requirements. We are very grateful that the
committee recognized the need for this funding and acted so promptly to
meet it.
The held mail began to arrive in late April and we made a concerted
effort to process it, and the fees it contained, as quickly as
possible. We met our goal of processing all of this held mail by
September 30th. As a result, the Office only used $1,850,000 by the end
of fiscal year 2002, and $5,650,000 of the supplemental funds remained
available. The Office is now, as directed by Congress, using the
remaining supplemental funds for basic operations in fiscal year 2003.
Our fiscal year 2003 annual appropriation was reduced by the same
amount. A principal part of the fiscal year 2004 request I put before
you today is to restore this $5,650,000 in base funding.
Our only program change request for fiscal year 2004 is for
$2,100,000 in new net appropriations and spending authority to build
integrated information technology systems to support our reengineered
Copyright Office business processes. The Office is designing these IT
systems to improve our services to the public and to meet the demand
for these services online. Copyright Office online services can be a
major source for the deposit of digital works to the Library of
Congress. The new net appropriation will be part of the $4.61 million
in fiscal year 2004 spending for IT systems analysis, design, and
development. I will address our reengineering program in greater detail
later in my testimony.
THE COPYRIGHT OFFICE MISSION
The Office's fiscal year 2004 budget request supports the Copyright
Office's mission to promote creativity by administering and sustaining
an effective national copyright system. The Office carries out the
following functions:
--Administration of the United States Copyright Law.--It processes
claims for copyright registration, documents for recordation,
and works deposited under the mandatory deposit provisions of
the law. It creates public records of these actions and
provides copies of deposited works for the Library's
collections. For more than 130 years, copyright deposits have
been a primary source of works for the Library, especially
works by American authors. The Office also administers the
law's compulsory licensing provisions, and convenes arbitration
panels to determine royalty rates, terms and conditions of
licenses, and the disposition of royalties.
--Policy Assistance, Regulatory Activities, and Litigation.--The
Office assists congressional committees in drafting and
analyzing legislation relating to intellectual property;
carries out important regulatory activities under the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act; represents the U.S. Government at
international meetings and diplomatic copyright conferences;
advises the U.S. Trade Representative, the State Department,
and the Commerce Department on domestic and international
copyright laws; and assists the Courts and the Department of
Justice in litigation involving copyright issues.
--Public Information and Education.--The Copyright Office provides
information to the public about United States copyright and
related laws and Copyright Office practices and procedures, and
conducts searches, which may be certified, of the copyright
records. The Office conducts outreach to inform the public
discussion of copyright issues.
FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET REQUEST SUMMARY
For fiscal year 2004, Offsetting Collections Authority remains at
the same level as fiscal year 2003--$23,321,000. This authority is
based on projected annual fee receipts of $21,500,000, and the use of
$1,821,000 from the Copyright Office no-year account.
The Copyright Office no-year account balance totaled $3,850,000 as
of September 30, 2002. In the current fiscal year the Office will use
$1,821,000 from the no-year account to partially fund the ongoing
reengineering program. In fiscal year 2004, the Office proposes to
continue using no-year account funds for the reengineering program: (1)
$1,441,000 to partially fund the IT improvements; and (2) $380,000 to
implement other aspects of reengineering. The use of the no-year funds
will essentially deplete this account.
REVIEW OF COPYRIGHT OFFICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND FUTURE PLANS
I would like to briefly highlight some of the Office's current and
past work, and our plans for fiscal year 2004.
Policy and Legal Responsibilities
The policy and regulatory work of the Copyright Office is largely
dictated by the Congress, through responsibilities it gives the Office
directly in the Copyright Act and through its setting of the
legislative agenda in this area. Digital technology brings both
opportunities and problems to the use of copyrighted works. Much is at
stake in policy deliberations in this area--both in economic terms and
in advancing education and learning. As such, our policy and regulatory
work in this area is both increasingly technical and often contentious.
The proceeding we completed last year on setting rates and terms for
``webcasting'' and the anticircumvention rulemaking now underway are
illustrative of this trend.
On the legislative front, we are pleased that the Technology,
Education and Copyright Harmonization (TEACH) Act was signed into law
last year. The TEACH Act promotes digital distance education by
implementing the recommendations made in my May 1999 report to Congress
titled ``Report on Copyright and Digital Distance Education.'' At the
request of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Copyright Office played
a key role in bringing about the compromise reflected in the
legislation by facilitating negotiations between the affected parties.
We also worked closely with the Judiciary Committees of both houses
on the issues raised by two 1999 rulings in which the Supreme Court
determined that the doctrine of sovereign immunity prevents states from
being held liable for damages for violations of the federal
intellectual property laws even though states enjoy the full protection
of those laws. Under current law, copyright owners are unable to obtain
monetary relief under the copyright law against a state, state entity,
or state employee unless the state waives its immunity. I testified on
February 27, 2002, in support of S. 1611. At the request of the
Judiciary Committees, the Office moderated negotiations between
intellectual property owners and public universities over the proposed
legislation, convening a series of meetings over a period of several
weeks. Through this process, the affected parties were able to reach
tentative agreement on some issues.
In a similar manner, over the past year we have advised Members and
staff on important issues such as piracy in peer-to-peer networks and
the protection of authentication measures affixed to or embedded in
certain copyrighted works.
Congress is also continuing to study options for reform of the
copyright arbitration royalty panel (CARP) system which the Office
administers. CARPs are temporary panels composed of hired arbitrators
who set or adjust royalty rates and terms of statutory licenses, and
determine royalty distributions. These panels have been operating under
the auspices of the Copyright Office and the Library of Congress since
Congress eliminated the Copyright Royalty Tribunal (CRT) in 1993.
I testified at a June 13 hearing before the House Subcommittee on
Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property to consider how
effective the CARP process has been thus far and ways in which it can
be improved. In that testimony, I reviewed the findings of a report on
CARP reform that the Office had prepared in 1998 at the request of the
Subcommittee, and I commented on the need to reform the CARP process.
The Subcommittee held another hearing on this topic this month, and I
provided testimony then as well. I would note that changes in the
arbitration system could result in functions that are now funded from
royalty pools being funded from appropriations. If reform legislation
is enacted this session with new requirements, our fiscal year 2004
request would need to be adjusted accordingly.
As I mentioned, this past year we completed what was perhaps the
most widely-noticed, and one of the most controversial, CARP
proceedings the Office has ever undertaken. It involved setting rates
and terms of payment for two statutory licenses that allow for the
public performance of a sound recording by means of digital audio
transmissions, ``webcasting'', and the making of ephemeral recordings
in furtherance of these transmissions. Under CARP procedures, the panel
proposes rates and terms and I make a recommendation to the Librarian
on whether to accept these proposals, or to reject them if they are
arbitrary or contrary to law. The Librarian, in a June 20 order,
accepted my recommendation to halve the CARP-proposed rates applicable
to Internet-only transmissions made by webcasters and commercial
broadcasters, while accepting the CARP-proposed rates for Internet
retransmissions of radio broadcasts made by these same services.
Later in the year, Congress passed into law the Small Webcaster
Settlement Act. This Act declares that all payments to be made by non-
commercial webcasters during the period of October 28, 1998 until May
31, 2003, which have not already been paid, shall not be due until June
20, 2003. With respect to small webcasters, SoundExchange was
authorized to negotiate agreements with small webcasters; such
agreements would cover the period from October 28, 1998 through
December 31, 2004. Once the terms of such agreements were published by
the Copyright Office in the Federal Register, they would be effective.
The law required that the royalty payments in these agreements be based
on a percentage of revenue or expenses, or both, and include a minimum
fee. These terms would apply in lieu of the decision by the Librarian.
To encourage agreements, payments of small webcasters would be delayed
up to December 15, 2002, the date for any agreements to be concluded.
An agreement was concluded on December 13 and published by the Office
in the Federal Register of December 24, 2002.
The section 1201 anticircumvention rulemaking we are currently
conducting is mandated by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which
provides that the Librarian may exempt certain classes of works from
the prohibition against circumvention of technological measures that
control access to copyrighted works. The purpose of this proceeding is
to determine whether there are particular classes of works as to which
users are, or are likely to be, adversely affected in their ability to
make noninfringing uses due to the prohibition on circumvention of
access controls. The first anticircumvention rulemaking under the DMCA
was completed in October 2000. The current rulemaking will conclude
this October.
The Copyright Office continues to provide ongoing assistance to
executive branch agencies on international matters, particularly the
United States Trade Representative (USTR), the Patent and Trademark
Office (PTO), and the Departments of State and Commerce. There is a
full agenda of international intellectual property issues in
international fora, such as those presented in free trade agreements,
and bilateral negotiations.
Copyright Office staff were part of the U.S. delegation in the May
13-17, 2002, and November 4-8, 2002 meetings of the World Intellectual
Property Organization (WIPO) Standing Committee on Copyright and
Related Rights, which is considering among other things, a possible
treaty on the protection of broadcasting organizations. In cooperation
with the PTO, staff prepared a proposed treaty text that became the
U.S. proposal and which differed in its scope from the proposals of
others because of its inclusion of certain activities of webcasters.
Staff served as part of the U.S. delegation in the World Trade
Organization (WTO) Council on TRIPS (trade-related aspects of
intellectual property rights), which met in November 2001 and March,
June, and September 2002. The TRIPS Council is responsible for
monitoring the operation of the TRIPS Agreement, and, in particular,
how members comply with their obligations under it. The Council reviews
the intellectual property laws of member countries for compliance with
TRIPS obligations.
Copyright Office staff were members of the U.S. delegation to the
November 2001 and September 2002 meetings of the Intellectual Property
Negotiating Group of the Free Trade Area of the Americas and were
instrumental in preparations, including the redrafting of U.S. treaty
proposals. We also participated in the drafting and negotiation of the
intellectual property provisions of bilateral Free Trade Agreements
with Chile and Singapore, including the drafting of proposed text, and
have also taken part in preliminary discussions concerning a possible
bilateral agreement with Morocco and multilateral agreements with
groups of nations in Central America and southern Africa.
As part of its responsibility to provide information and assistance
to federal departments and agencies and the Judiciary on copyright
matters, the Copyright Office has assisted the Department of Justice in
a number of cases, most notably in defending the challenge to the
Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA), resulting in the recent decision
by the Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft upholding to CTEA.
Registration, Recordation and Cataloging Operations
The Copyright Office registered and cataloged more than one-half
million claims for copyrighted works during fiscal year 2002, despite
the effects of anthrax incidents on Capitol Hill mail and the
subsequent postal disruption which hampered the flow of claims into the
Office. The Office received 526,138 claims to copyright covering more
than 800,000 works and registered 521,041 claims. The Cataloging
Division received 520,752 registrations in fiscal year 2002 and created
cataloging records for 578,658. The Division reduced the amount of
registrations awaiting cataloging from 183,204 to 78,379, a decrease of
57 percent.
The Documents Recordation Section received 12,600 documents for
recordation and cleared 10,506, covering nearly 218,000 titles of
works.
During the fiscal year, the Copyright Office transferred to the
Library of Congress for its collections 896,504 copies of registered
and unregistered works valued at $31,302,048.
Licensing Activities
During fiscal year 2002, the Copyright Office administered eight
CARP proceedings that included five rate adjustment proceedings and
three distribution proceedings. Of the five rate adjustment
proceedings, four involved setting rates and terms for the section 114
digital performance right in sound recordings, and the section 112
statutory license for the making of ephemeral recordings to facilitate
these transmissions. The fifth proceeding involved setting rates and
terms for the section 118 statutory license for the use of certain
copyrighted works in connection with noncommercial broadcasting.
The Copyright Office administers the compulsory licenses and a
statutory obligation under title 17. The Licensing Division collects
royalty fees from cable operators for retransmitting television and
radio broadcasts, from satellite carriers for retransmitting
``superstation'' and network signals, and from importers and
manufacturers of digital audio recording products for later
distribution to copyright owners. In fiscal year 2002, the Office
distributed approximately $110 million to copyright owners. The
Division deducts its full operating costs from the royalty fees and
invests the balance in interest-bearing securities with the U.S.
Treasury.
Copyright Education
Copyright education is a particularly important aspect of our work,
as more and more people implicate copyright laws in their daily online
activities. The Copyright Office responds to public requests for
information in person, through its website, and via email, telephone,
and correspondence. It also engages in outreach programs to educate the
public about copyright issues.
In fiscal year 2002, the Office as a whole responded to 358,604
requests for direct reference services, including 57,263 email
inquiries, of which some 10,000 were on the issue of webcasting. The
Public Information Section assisted 25,005 members of the public in
person, taking in 17,644 registration applications and 2,884 documents
for recordation. The Section answered 123,106 telephone inquiries,
10,783 letter requests, and 31,681 email requests for information from
the public, representing an over 100 percent increase in the use of
email communications. This increase in electronic mail requests is
partly a result of the public using an alternative means of
communication during the mail disruption and website modifications that
made it easier to contact the Office by email.
The Copyright Office website continued to play a key role in
disseminating information to the copyright community and the general
public, with 13 million hits on key pages during the year, an 8 percent
increase over the prior year.
Reengineering Program
Over the past three years, we have been undergoing intensive
planning and design to improve each of the public services I have just
described. The Office's Reengineering Program will reshape the delivery
of our public services. We are very grateful for the support this
Committee has given this important effort.
The program is progressing along four fronts: process,
organization, facilities, and information technology. All of these
areas are linked to each other and have to proceed together. We are
making good progress and our request for fiscal year 2004 will allow us
to maintain this momentum. Our goal is to complete implementation of
our new processes and IT systems in fiscal year 2005.
This budget requests $2,100,000 to support the development of
integrated information technology systems for our reengineered public
services. This request will augment the $2,500,000 to be obtained from
the Office's base budget. The entire reengineering program depends on
the development and implementation of new information technology
systems. So many of the efficiencies we will gain will be from using
new and better technology, and having all our systems integrated rather
than working through numerous stand-alone systems as we do now.
Our fiscal year 2004 request, and our information technology work
as a whole, is based on careful planning that has been done over the
past two years. We have completed an extensive study and planning
effort to design business processes which improve the delivery of our
public services and allow the public to secure these services online to
the maximum extent possible. Once we developed processes that we
believe will enable us to best serve the public, we completed an IT
requirements analysis, which identified logical systems components and
potential software packages. This year we plan to award a contract,
through a government-wide agency contract (GWAC), to begin the work of
building integrated information technology systems.
The $2.1 million in new net appropriations will be part of an
overall $4.61 million budget for this IT systems development work.
CONCLUSION
We expect this will be a busy Congressional session addressing
copyright matters; we will continue our close collaboration with the
committees and individual Members on these often complex and wide-
reaching issues. As we continue to fulfill the responsibilities given
us under the copyright law, including making over one-half million
registrations each year, we are also intent on maintaining the progress
of our Reengineering Program to improve these services. Our fiscal year
2004 request permits us to meet these challenges.
______
Prepared Statement of Daniel P. Mulhollan, Director, Congressional
Research Service
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I appreciate the
opportunity to appear before you today to present the fiscal 2004
budget request for the Congressional Research Service (CRS). Our
request focuses on two areas of critical importance to the mission and
continued success of CRS: ensuring continuity of business operations
and investing in a new generation of workers who choose public service.
Before discussing the details of our request, however, I would like to
thank the Subcommittee for its generous support of our fiscal 2003
budget.
ASSISTING THE CONGRESS IN A CHANGED WORLD SETTING
I come before you today at a time of unprecedented circumstances
for the Congress, for our Nation, and for the world. We are a Nation at
war. Beyond increasing efforts to ensure the safety and security of our
staff and systems here on Capitol Hill, CRS continues to work closely
with Members and Committees in both Houses on a multitude of issues.
The mission of CRS is to contribute to an informed national
legislature--a mission of critical importance during a time of foreign
turbulence and domestic uncertainties. Our country's past experience,
from the Civil War to Vietnam, suggests that during wartime Congress
faces enormous challenges in exercising its constitutional legislative
and oversight responsibilities. During the Civil War the Congress
created the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War to investigate
military operations. Although subject to criticism for its procedures
and operations, some scholars have credited the Committee for
contributing significantly to the war effort. The experience of World
War II, which saw the creation of the so-called ``Truman Committee'' to
oversee an unprecedented growth in military spending, led to a
determination by Congress that it required independent, objective
analytical support in order to design legislative solutions to the
problems facing the country and to evaluate effectively the proposals,
policies, and operations put forward by the Executive Branch.
Consequently, the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 included the
first statutory charter for CRS with a commitment that Congress would
have access to research expertise at the same level of quality
available to the President.
Similar developments occurred during the Vietnam War, when Congress
was again forced to make critical decisions on issues affecting U.S.
foreign policy, military capability, economic policy, and domestic
stability. Congress again concluded that it needed additional support
in order to evaluate the implications of competing legislative
proposals and to monitor the myriad programs administered by the
Executive Branch. As a result, the Legislative Reorganization Act of
1970 enhanced the mission and functions of the Legislative Branch by
expanding the roles and mandates of the Congress' support agencies,
including CRS, leading to a rapid increase in our staff and research
capabilities.
The United States is engaged in a period of international conflict
that is likely to be more complex and threatening than any we have
faced before. While traditional and conventional military action may be
intense, as exemplified by Iraq and Afghanistan, the combination of
world-wide terrorist networks and rogue states possessing lethal
weaponry leaves us with the prospect of continuing risks and
uncertainty, both at home and abroad--this war on terrorism is a war
without boundaries and with no end in sight. In all of the times that
the U.S. government has had to confront a war and organized terrorism,
the challenges have never been as great, nor the consequences of
failure more potentially catastrophic. The budgetary implications of
this war on terrorism and the needs of homeland security are enormous
and will continue to rise, as will numerous questions about how much is
adequate, how priorities should be set, and how resources should be
allocated. New policies and programs may be needed to defend against
conventional, biological, chemical, and nuclear attack by improving our
threat assessment and response capabilities, federal coordination, law
enforcement capabilities, and public health services. Indeed, most of
the issues on the Administration and Congressional agendas are being
reexamined and reshaped. Congress must be prepared to address these
challenges in both the short and long term, and CRS must be prepared to
help you.
Building on our already close working relationship, my goal is for
CRS to be there with you at every step of the way as you examine a
range of critical issues with vital consequences for all Americans. The
activities supporting the war and homeland security may involve
difficult tradeoffs between the need for greater security on the one
hand, and important economic, social, and constitutional considerations
on the other. Similarly, budgetary realities may well require tough
choices among competing priorities, as new responsibilities for
establishing stable and democratic regimes overseas are superimposed on
multiple requirements for military preparedness, domestic and social
programs, counter-terrorism and intelligence capabilities, and economic
stimulus.
Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for the opportunity CRS has had to
serve you during this difficult time in our nation's history, and I am
proud that so many Members and staff have called upon us to deliver the
type of objective, nonpartisan assistance that only CRS can provide.
Each Member who has called to request a briefing, and each staffer who
has called to discuss the implications of a particular policy issue or
problem, has given us an opportunity to contribute. We identify the
policy problems the Congress is likely to face, seek out solutions to
those problems and analyze the implications of those solutions for
policy. We undertake this legislative research often in anticipation of
the legislative agenda and in collaboration with you, your colleagues,
and staff. Thus, we are ready to offer the full analytic/research
capacity of the Service to you when you need it. Congress can continue
to rely on CRS to advise and assist the Congress in the analysis,
appraisal, and evaluation of legislative proposals, in order to assess
the advisability of enactment, estimate the probable consequences of
such enactment, both intended and unintended, and examine alternative
options. This work must be done in a manner that is confidential,
objective, and nonpartisan, and that offers a balanced treatment of the
issues involved and a range of options for legislative action. Our
statutory charter makes it clear that our sole mission is to serve the
Congress. The financial investment that I seek in this year's budget
request is an investment with multiple benefits: (1) to continue to
serve the Congress whenever and wherever you need us--within a flexible
and secure technical infrastructure; (2) to enhance our research by
establishing capacity to procure, create, maintain and manipulate the
large data sets upon which CRS analysts rely to conduct their public
policy assessments of legislative proposals and specific program
implementation; and (3) to provide CRS managers with flexible tools and
incentives that can be used to encourage staff retention.
CONTINUITY OF BUSINESS OPERATIONS TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF CONGRESS AT ALL
TIMES
Much of your attention today is focused on security matters--both
here at home and abroad. The first set of initiatives that I present to
you relates to safeguarding further the Service's infrastructure to
ensure that CRS will be ready to support your work needs at any time,
any place, and in any situation.
The tragic events of September 11, 2001, and the anthrax incidents
on Capitol Hill, mandate different and additional organizational
procedures for every business entity, in both the public and private
sectors, to confront and guard against the ongoing threat of terrorism.
Through a shared effort with the House and Senate, CRS and the Library
of Congress will implement an Alternative Computing Facility and
Disaster Recovery site. With the additional funding that we are
seeking, we will plan, design, and implement a backup facility that can
support CRS and the Congress by mirroring the current technical
environment. The alternative site will provide us with the
functionality to resume service to Congress in the event that the
Madison Building computer facilities are no longer available.
Second, like most government information technology organizations,
CRS has mission-critical technical applications that need to be
available in a secure environment 24 hours a day and 7 days a week (24/
7) under a variety of threat scenarios. Our Inquiry Status and
Information System--ISIS--is the mission-critical application used to
receive confidential requests from Congress, assign the work to CRS
analysts, track the work status through completion, and provide
managers with key performance statistics and indicators. The current
architecture of the ISIS application cannot support secure 24/7 access
from remote locations or when the Library's computer facilities are not
available, a condition that we will have corrected by the end of fiscal
2004 if funded.
The last initiative is in response to a Congressional requirement
stated in the fiscal 2003 Appropriations Act. The Congress directed CRS
to take steps to ensure that the Service's materials are available to
Congress whenever and wherever they may be required. Meeting this
congressional mandate requires that CRS staff--the creators of the
research and information materials--be as mobile as Congress and be
able to work from a variety of places other than their own offices.
This need can arise in a number of different circumstances--including
normal work situations as well as emergencies.
Under normal circumstances, for example, a CRS staffer working
closely with a conference committee late at night in the Capitol may
require secure access to statistical data that the committee needs to
decide the final version of a distribution formula for a particular
program. An example of an emergency situation is the anthrax incident
that occurred in October 2001 and forced the evacuation of a number of
congressional and Capitol Hill buildings, including the Madison
Building. All CRS staff and many congressional staff had to work from
alternative locations for varying amounts of time. During this period,
CRS staff could not access information and research materials stored on
their personal computers or on CRS servers and, had the emergency
lasted much longer, they would not have been able to support Members
and committees as required.
In both normal and emergency work situations, CRS staff need secure
access to the full range of information and research systems currently
available through the Library's computer center and CRS' servers. From
wherever they might be located, our staff need to be able to receive
and track requests that Members and committees place by phone or via
the CRS Web site. To respond to these requests and perform the required
analyses, staff need access to the full text of their research and
information sources as well as to their raw data and databases to which
the Service subscribes or which it builds in-house. CRS staff need to
be able to create reports and other products that respond to
congressional requests and they need to get those reports and products
to Congress by uploading them to a Web site or including them in a
secure email message for delivery. I am requesting funds to develop and
implement technical solutions that will provide staff with remote
access, from a variety of alternative work sites, to electronic
research and information resources so that analysis can be conducted
wherever CRS staff may have to work.
Our goal is continuity of basic business operations. Accordingly, I
am requesting $3.3 million to establish the CRS alternative computing
facility, to make ISIS portable, and to develop technical solutions to
support the Congress at any time, at any location. Concurrent with the
submission of this budget request, the Library submitted a fiscal 2003
supplemental appropriation request, on behalf of CRS, for $1.863
million. If that request is approved, CRS can begin immediately with
implementation of our portion of the ACF and the ISIS reprogramming,
leaving $1.460 million for our fiscal 2004 needs.
ADDING CRS CAPACITY FOR DATA BASE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
Congress looks to CRS for analysis and information that is derived
from large data sets and surveys because much of the data needed is not
collected by executive branch agencies or the states. CRS relies
increasingly on quantitative analysis to support its work for
committees and Members. Examples of some of the Service's most recent
efforts include: analysis of caseload data in the TANF program,
simulation of alternative policy options for child care tax credits,
and a historical analysis of foreign aid. To meet this growing demand
most efficiently, CRS must build permanent, skilled capacity to assign
basic data collection, acquisition, maintenance, cataloging, data
manipulation, and processing tasks.
In fiscal 2002, the Congress provided CRS with funding to enhance
its research capacity by building a more powerful technical
infrastructure and adding staff who could perform high-level
statistical analyses. Given the growing number, size and complexity of
data sets, the maintenance of these data sets now requires a Service-
wide investment that ensures sound data management practices and
supports the integrity and authoritativeness of the data. The data
management activities include data acquisition, data library functions
and data preparation--a professional skill set with industry standards.
CRS is at a point where we need to add capacity to handle these new,
increasing, and on-going, critical business functions that support the
research efforts being performed by top analytic staff. Our fiscal 2004
proposal will enhance our overall research by establishing specific
capacity to procure, create, maintain and manipulate large data sets
upon which CRS analysts rely. The proposal includes contract staff for
the technical data upkeep of these data sets and one new permanent
librarian to ensure business continuity and integrity of the data
content. The additional staff, with specialized data skills, will
implement industry-standard practices for data management uniformly
throughout the Service. This new capacity will assure: (1)
authoritativeness and timeliness of the data through regularly
scheduled, and often frequent, data refreshment activities; (2) rapid
access to the data through use of industry-standard data base
structure, cataloging, and maintenance activities; and (3) consistent
use and interpretation of the content through standard cataloging and
data manipulation activities. To establish a new capacity and a formal
structure for data base management activities, I am requesting $0.759
million.
INVESTING IN THE FUTURE: INCENTIVES THAT ENCOURAGE STAFF RETENTION
The last, albeit no less important, focus of our fiscal 2004 budget
request addresses updating management tools that meet the work needs
and expectations of a new generation. We are making substantial process
in hiring new staff and meeting our FTE targets. With Congress' help
over the past several years, CRS has made significant staffing
investments through our multi-year succession initiative and new
staffing approvals for experts in information technology, combating
terrorism, and multiple policy aspects of or related to the aging of
the American population. We have integrated the concepts of succession
and transition staffing into our formal strategic and annual program
planning efforts and I want to assure you that I continue to adjust
existing staff and resources to align with the Congress' legislative
needs. We are asking Congress' assistance to help us to enhance the
productivity, efficiency, and attractiveness of CRS as both a first
choice research service-provider to the Congress and as a first choice
work-place to a new generation of workers who are electing public
service as a career. To maximize fully our research capacity and
talent, we must provide the requisite ``work tools'' that staff need to
produce the highest analytic quality product for the Congress, and we
must do our best to retain a highly skilled, well-trained, and
motivated workforce.
In terms of retaining the talent drawn to CRS, I am requesting
funding to initiate a Loan Forgiveness Pilot Program. Retention is a
top priority for CRS because the Service will need a large number of
stable, experienced staff to replace those who will be retiring in the
next few years. CRS has already invested considerable money and effort
to acquire and develop its current work force to prepare for the
upcoming retirements. Expanding this investment plan to retain a high
quality staff makes good business sense and ensures our ability to
maintain our capacity to serve the Congress as retirements of senior
staff occur. This program will allow CRS to initiate a pilot program
that provides for the repayment of student loans. Assisting staff in
repaying student loans allows us to use this benefit selectively to
ensure continuity of service over the next years. During the one-year
pilot, CRS would determine eligibility, against a set of pre-determined
criteria, for no more than 70 percent of analysts and computer
specialists hired over the past three years, plus 20 incumbents in
selected at-risk positions whose loss would seriously impair CRS'
ability to achieve its strategic goals and objectives.
We are also seeking a modest increase to our travel, training, and
awards budget allocations--again as retention incentives. CRS currently
has approximately half the training funds per employee when compared to
Executive Branch agencies. An attendant benefit of this modest
investment is to provide new staff with continuing training experiences
that foster their ability to assume quickly the responsibilities of the
veteran staff they are replacing. Members of this bright new generation
seek out organizations that are willing to offer opportunities for
continued training and to provide learning experiences that foster
professional growth, development, and rapid integration into the
business content and culture. Further, travel and training
opportunities are vital to the veteran research staff to keep them
abreast of often changing research approaches, information, and
research results. These off-site experiences keep them networked into
policy research communities and enrich their analysis through exposure
to new ideas, techniques, and information research tools. To establish
incentives to encourage staff retention, I am requesting $0.535
million.
STATUS OF FISCAL 2003 NEW CAPACITY INITIATIVE
I want to thank you once again for providing CRS with the half-year
funding in fiscal 2003 to acquire 12 additional research staff to
address terrorism, homeland security, and an aging U.S. population. We
expect to have 11 of these staff selected by the end of this fiscal
year, with the last one to be hired by the end of the calendar year.
They bring capacities such as biotechnology, epidemiology, physics,
engineering, gerontology, and transportation safety. Given the current
world situation, the addition of this new expertise will be invaluable
to the Congress with the work CRS undertakes to support your
deliberations.
CONCLUSION
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to appear
before you and your colleagues today. CRS is the only source of public
policy information and research analysis focused solely on the
Legislative Branch. We take seriously our mission to contribute
substantively to the overall knowledge base of the Congress by
providing comprehensive and reliable analysis, research, and
information services that are responsive, confidential, objective,
authoritative, and timely. As a shared staff resource for the entire
Congress, CRS is a cost-effective means of enhancing the Legislative
Branch's capacity for meeting its constitutional responsibilities
during this time of continued challenge.
Once again, CRS continues to adjust existing resources to align
with the Congress' needs. Our fiscal 2004 request reflects new measures
and capacities that cannot be drawn from existing resources. I hope you
find that we are meeting our mission, and that we are doing so in a way
that warrants your continued trust and support.
RUSSIAN LEADERSHIP PROGRAM--OPEN WORLD
Senator Stevens. Have you called attention to the letter
you filed about the Open World Program?
Dr. Billington. No, but I am happy to----
Senator Stevens. I just want to call to the attention of
the members that this is a program created by a bill I
introduced that was Dr. Billington's idea, a very successful
one. And I say that advisedly. Dr. Billington and I will go
over and have a celebration in Russia concerning this program
over the weekend. And I look forward to that. And maybe you
will help me get out of here.
Senator Campbell. I think it works the other way around,
Senator. You have to help me get out of here.
POLICE MERGER
Let me proceed with a few questions myself. We talked at
length about the Library Police merging with the Capitol
Police. I am particularly interested in that, I guess maybe
because I was a deputy sheriff years ago. I had an opportunity
to talk to Speaker Hastert a couple days ago, because I
understood that he was not supporting that merger.
He said he did not see the need for merging them and having
all the training go to the Library of Congress Police that
would be simply checking books in and out. So I think there has
been a disconnect on information somewhere. Would you explain
to the committee which people are going to merge that work for
the Library of Congress, which would actually need police
training, which will not merge and do not need training?
Because I want to pass that on to him.
Dr. Billington. Yes. I think I will defer----
Senator Campbell. General Scott.
General Scott. Yes, sir.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, our Library of
Congress Police consists of 131 police officers. These police
officers are empowered with the full force of the law on the
premises of the Library of Congress. Their primary
responsibilities are to man the entrance and exit points in the
Library of Congress.
In that context, they differ, their duties differ, from
other police on Capitol Hill, in that not only are they
concerned with what comes in the building, but they are very
concerned about what goes out of the building. They conduct
exit inspections, looking particularly for library properties,
such as manuscripts, books, records, all that make up our
collections.
Of that number, 131 police, all of them have to have
training as police officers in order to maintain their
credibility and their status. Of that number, about 70 percent
man the entrances and exits. Then there is another percentage
that operates the police command center. But, that is basically
what our police do that is different than what the other police
officers do.
Senator Campbell. I see. I understand that Speaker Hastert
does not support that 3-year effective date that I understand
is now pending in the supplemental conference. So we need to do
some work with him apparently.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS POLICE FORCE
Let me go on with some more police questions that are of
interest to me, too. The Library is requesting 51 additional
officers in the fiscal year 2004 budgets. Are they needed now
at this state, or is there any particular deadline by which you
think it is going to be imperative that they are online?
General Scott. Yes, sir. We are requesting 51 police
officers in this particular fiscal year 2004 budget. These
officers were identified as part of the Library's coordination
with the Capitol Police back in 1999. At that time, we were all
looking at our security requirements to ensure that, one, we
had all of our positions currently identified and those that we
expected to bring online in 2004.
We submitted our request for 51 new officers because we
have new posts that we have to man. We have not coordinated the
hiring of these new officers with the Capitol Police. We are
not resisting doing that. As a matter of fact, we look forward
to doing that, because, where we can, we attempt to meet the
hiring standards of the Capitol Police.
POLICE STAFFING STUDY
Senator Campbell. Is that what you call a posting study?
General Scott. Posting study?
Senator Campbell. Yes. I am not sure what that term means.
Do you recognize that term?
General Scott. I do not recognize it, but I will ask my
director of security, if you do not mind.
Senator Campbell. Yes. Please identify yourself for the
record.
Mr. Lopez. Kenneth Lopez, Director of Security, Library of
Congress. And the question was, sir?
Senator Campbell. What is a posting study?
Mr. Lopez. A posting study is essentially what we do--we
call it a staffing study. It is where you look at your posts,
and you determine what your minimum staffing level is for that
particular post, depending on the function of the post and the
time of the day.
Senator Campbell. I see.
Mr. Lopez. And that is essentially what we do, too. The
term is different than what we use, but it is the same
principle.
Senator Campbell. I see. Well, any additional officers that
you bring on, they will not negatively impact that impending
time frame for the merger, will they?
Mr. Lopez. I do not know what the time frame is that has
been identified.
Senator Campbell. Is it 3 years? A minimum of 3 years, yes.
Mr. Lopez. It would not negatively impact us, if we were
able to hire the people. Because we are asking for approval to
hire these new police officers in fiscal year 2004, and were
able to bring them onboard, then it would not leave any
weaknesses in our perimeter.
DIGITAL FUTURE INITIATIVE
Senator Campbell. Let me go back to you, Dr. Billington.
This might not be in your mission but, the rebuilding of Iraq
is on everybody's minds now. You told me that you will not be
taking on any new functions. Is there anything that the Library
of Congress does for new and emerging democracies? For example,
Iraq does not obviously have libraries that experience a kind
of total freedom of expression that we have in this country. Is
there any connection at all with the Library of Congress and
emerging or rebuilding or new democracies?
Dr. Billington. Well, yes. There is quite an historic
connection to that part of the world. We have six overseas
offices. It is not quite formally our responsibility, but since
these offices are in the region for instance, we have offices
in Islamabad, Cairo, New Delhi, Jakarta, Nairobi, and Rio de
Janeiro--there may be a role for us to play.
After the first Gulf War, for instance, a good deal of the
reconstruction of the National Library of Kuwait was from our
duplicates in the Cairo office. And we would certainly want to
be helpful with whatever we have in Cairo, Islamabad, and New
Delhi.
I mentioned the example of the Law Library replenishing the
basic law codes of Afghanistan. This is very frequently the
case. As far as the countries of the Middle East are concerned,
our overseas offices--where we do the procuring, not only for
the Library of Congress, but for other research libraries in
America that cover the Middle East--may be useful in helping
Iraqi Libraries. I note that we are in fact the largest Arabic
language library in the world. We can, and we want to be,
helpful in any way that we can.
In addition, we are exploring with our online services ways
to connect to the Middle East. We are going international with
a project called Global Gateways; one of our leading Arabic
curators is in Cairo at the moment, exploring a joint project
with the National Library of Egypt, which is encouraging.
EMERGING DEMOCRACIES
Finally, in the former Communist countries, at the
direction of the Congress, we sent over teams, largely from the
Congressional Research Service, to explore the possibility of,
where they were establishing new parliaments, to advise them
how they can establish a nonpartisan research base.
Senator Campbell. Is that under the provision that Senator
Stevens had talked about?
Dr. Billington. No. That is an earlier program than the one
that Senator Stevens mentioned, Open World, which is a new and
even larger initiative which the Library launched in 1999 with
Russia. The former effort was aimed at building a kind of
miniature Congressional Research Service for Eastern European
nations. One of the things people do not remember is when
people have not had freedom, and they set up a legislature, if
they do not have any information, they do not have any
knowledge. Democracy has to be knowledge based. I mean, it is
one of the great lessons of the American experience.
And so--and after the war, for instance, in Japan and
Korea, they set up diet libraries. They had not had them
before, but it was an imitation of the Congress' initiative in
Japan and South Korea. So this has also been done for all of
the countries of the former Soviet empire.
Now more recently, the very visionary legislation which
Senator Stevens championed, resulted in the emergence of what
is now called Open World. Congress recently changed the name
from the Russian Leadership Program. Open World has been
expanded this year. Both Houses have approved the idea of
exploring two or three new countries for pilot programs. And we
are now analyzing where they are most needed. Talking with the
State Department and with others, we have narrowed the list
down to five.
And two of the five being considered, for instance, are the
former Islamic republics of Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, both of
which have American bases in them and have been very supportive
to the United States, both of the war on terrorism and more
recently with Enduring Freedom in Iraq. So--as well as looking
into the Ukraine, Lithuania, and other----
Senator Campbell. Is Belarus a candidate for that?
Dr. Billington. Yes, Belarus is one of the five being
considered--Belarus, Lithuania, Ukraine, Uzbekistan and
Kyrgyzstan. And since Congress has changed the name to Open
World, we now have a mandate to expand beyond Russia. I know
CRS has had people from Mexico saying they would like to
explore the possibility at various times of looking into this.
When Nigeria moved in a democratic direction, we had a
delegation from Nigeria that came into my office and was very
interested in how CRS functions. But, of course, they are
thinking in more modest terms.
I think there is a great deal the Library can do and has
done, both in terms of restocking and helping their libraries
develop and also in terms of the Internet, where we have this
big international presence, but also in terms of possibly
helping them support their legislatures.
In many of these emerging democracies, the executive branch
has engulfed all the other branches of Government. I might just
say that the experience in the last year with the Russian
Leadership, the Open World Program, has been particularly good
because we have invited judges over, to help develop an
independent judiciary. We have had 300 or so judges over, and
many of them have established sister court relationships with
American courts. And it has been a very stimulating thing.
That program, the Russian Leadership Program, which is now
being modeled out for possible other areas, has the great
virtue of bringing people to see how the American system works.
It is not travel. They stay in one community. And they have
come from all 89 regions of Russia and stayed in all 50 States.
Our participants reflect more than 50 different ethnic groups
participating from Russia. We forget that Russia is a big,
multi-ethnic society, as are we.
So it has been very successful--more than 40 percent of
these have been women, which is totally new. And, of course, as
you look around the world, that is another area ripe for more
full democratic development in many emerging democracies. So I
think exposure to the American system, through Open World which
is modeled on the 1.5 percent of the Marshall Plan that was
designated for training young Germans after the war, is
successful because it brings young Russian leaders over here to
see for themselves how America works. They see things that we
take for granted.
And so I think there are a number of ways in which the
Library, for one reason or another, has gotten into this kind
of activity and we would want to be helpful at the Congress'
instruction in terms of where the legislative branch sees its
priorities. All I would stress is that for a new democracy, a
functioning legislature is essential. One of the progressive
things that has happened in Russia is they moved from ruling by
presidential decree, which is basically what President
Yeltsin--for all his other good qualities--was doing in the
last years--to getting through laws that are stamped by a
legislature which broadly represents the whole country. Even if
the legislature is weak and even if maybe there are other
things wrong with it, it is still a great step forward and one
of the more decisive steps in making sure you do not revert to
kind of absolute autocratic rule.
Senator Campbell. Oh, I think the effort we have put
forward as a nation to help any of the emerging democracies is
really important. The last few years, I have been the Chairman
of the Helsinki Commission.
And speaking of Belarus, I have met five times with a young
legislator of Belarus, three times in international meetings
and twice he came here. Interesting enough, every time after I
met with him, he got put in jail, which does not speak very
well to my prestige in Belarus, I guess. But he told me that
two of his colleagues, who were taken out of the parliament,
were never heard of again. Two more that he served with are
still in prison. So they have a real adversarial relationship
with the president of Belarus.
But any kind of information we can get in to their hands
that would help promote democracy are probably really well
received by the people.
Dr. Billington. We have a classic problem in choosing--take
Belarus and Lithuania. One is quite a repressive society, as
you know, Belarus. The other is a very open, democratic
society, even going into NATO and so forth. And you want to
reward the good guys, but you also want to help the people who
are having difficulty.
Exactly the same juxtaposition between Uzbekistan and
Kyrgyzstan. Kyrgyzstan is an amazingly progressive, functioning
democracy in very difficult circumstances. Uzbekistan is much
more authoritarian. So how do you judge which one to invest
your small pilot efforts in? There is an argument can be made
for both, but it is not easy to decide.
SECURITY--CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER
Senator Campbell. Let me do this in rounds, so that Senator
Bennett can participate in this, too.
Senator, if you would like to ask a few questions?
Senator Bennett. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do not
have any specific questions.
I am glad you are pursuing the Russian project, because
that is one that is near and dear to Senator Stevens' heart.
And during my stewardship, we kept a warm blanket around to
keep it going. And I am glad to see that it still receives the
support that I think it deserves.
The only question I would have, going back to the issue of
the police merger, I am assuming, Dr. Billington, General
Scott, that as the visitors center progresses, you are paying
attention to the integration between the Library and the
Capitol that will occur as a result of the visitors center and
the tunnel. I do not know if you have any feel for how many
visitors to the Library will come through the tunnel or if you
are planning to steer all of your visitors through the visitors
center, as a security measure.
Because from a terrorist point of view, the Capitol campus
is the number one target in the world. And while the Capitol is
the symbol that the terrorists want to take down on television,
the Library of Congress, particularly the Jefferson Building,
is close enough that they would take that, if they could not
get into the Capitol. So--well, you understand all this. We
have had this conversation.
But have you looked into the visitors center, or are you
making plans for the impact on the visitors center? And I would
be interested in knowing if you are planning to redirect
traffic yourself to the Library through the visitors center or
if you are going to keep separate entrances open.
Dr. Billington. I would just say I think this is going to
greatly increase the security and the efficiency and also the
convenience to people who want to see the exhibits and see the
beauty of the great hall and so forth, because very often they
have to wait out in the snow or in the cold in rather long
lines. The efficiency of having one major entry point for
visitors is very good.
We also hope that the Capitol Visitor Center will be able
to dramatize not so much something about the Library of
Congress, but something about the Congress that is
insufficiently appreciated and understood, namely that this
legislature has preserved the mint record of private creativity
in the United States through the copyright deposit system.
This is a unique thing. No legislature has ever done this
in any other part of the world. We have the largest performing
arts library in the world, music and movies and all of this. To
demonstrate this, not as a Library of Congress collection, but
as a work of preservation of the legislative branch of
Government, will be a great thing.
So we anticipate a great increase in visitors, but at the
same time a commensurate increase in security protection by
having this main entry point to the whole complex and relating
it. I do not know if General Scott has further comments.
General Scott. Well, I would just add, Senator, that we
certainly will comply and cooperate, fully cooperate, with
whatever standards there needs to be in order to make sure that
we do not have a weak link at any point in the entry or exit of
this Capitol complex. I am not aware that we have come to any
final conclusion as to where visitors are going to be routed
yet. I think that is yet to be planned and coordinated.
But I just want to share with the committee that Dr.
Billington has always stressed that we will cooperate fully
with securing the Capitol complex.
Mr. Lopez. I would like to say, sir, that we are meeting on
an ongoing basis with the Capitol Police and the Architect of
the Capitol to facilitate passage between the two entities,
even if there were separate entrances, to use the connecting
tunnel for our exit inspection and also utilizing the Capitol's
entrance into the visitors center as essentially our entrance
into the Library, if they came through the visitor center
tunnel. But we have not reached the point about talking about
that as the only entrance until a decision is made.
Senator Bennett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
AUTOMATED HIRING SYSTEM
Senator Campbell. In 2001, the Library installed a new
automated hiring system that was required by a court order.
What is the status of that system? And will you be able to hire
up to the level that Congress authorized for fiscal year 2003?
Dr. Billington. Well, we have increased both the quantity
and the speed of our hiring very dramatically after some
initial problems with adjustment to it. But General Scott can
speak to the details, because he has been watching this very
closely.
General Scott. Thank you, Dr. Billington.
Senator Campbell. Yes, please.
General Scott. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we have made
substantial progress in using the automated hiring system to
fill our hiring needs. This past fiscal year, we hired 300 good
quality applicants using the system. Now that compares
favorably, very favorably, with only 190 hires in the
administrative and professional categories of a year ago.
We continue to look at that system and develop a fully
functioning merit selection system, so that we have a pool of
applicants that are not only highly qualified, but a pool that
gives us diversity and everything else that you would want to
have in a modern system.
So yes, in summary, we are not satisfied with where we are,
but the system has demonstrated that it is meeting our hiring
needs.
Senator Campbell. Thank you.
Dr. Billington. We used to have an average of 18 applicants
for a position. We now have an average of 94. So getting it out
electronically gives a much richer pool. And that is a real
plus. That gives you added possibilities for diversity in every
sense of the word and for surveying a very wide panel. So I
think it does reach out much more effectively, as well.
NATIONAL DIGITAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND PRESERVATION PROGRAM
[NDIIPP]
Senator Campbell. Let me ask you something about the
National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation
Program. You recently received the committee's approval to
proceed with spending $25 million of the $100 million that was
appropriated for that program. What is the status of that
effort now?
Dr. Billington. Well, the National Digital Information
Infrastructure and Preservation Program is a three-stage
process. The appropriation has already been made, just a few
pennies under $100 million, $5 million of which was released to
start this process. We have had a couple hundred experts
involved. We had a whole series of strategy meetings with
convened groups. We had a small group of Government agencies
that we had to specially consult with under the legislation.
And we have devised this--we submitted this plan, which was
approved by five different Congressional committees. There is a
thicker appendix backup to the plan as well.
And now we are going on to the next stage, which was
designed to be a release of another $20 million; and we asked
to have included in that release the first $15 million of the
$75 million which needs to be matched. So we are not starting
on the match right away, but we will hope to be planning for
that this summer and begin to see if we can get either in-kind
or cash matching.
Now what has happened is that we have defined specific
things that have to be accomplished in the next phase. We have
developed a kind of base technical architecture for this
network. And we have worked with a whole series of partners
very effectively, in the information technology industry,
libraries and archives, the producers of intellectual property,
the consumers of the material, all the different interest
groups.
So we have sort of a basic agreement that we will now
further develop and refine the architecture. We will begin to
form partnerships for a series of pilot projects. The aim of
this, of course, is to acquire, find ways of acquiring and
preserving and getting rights-protected access to the amazing
amount of materials that is being produced on the Internet that
does not survive, and which very often is born digital, and
only available in digital forms. The average life of a website
is only about 44 days.
In addition to beginning the partnerships and perfecting
the technical architecture, the National Science Foundation and
other collaborating Government agencies also are going to be
doing research. This is a tremendous conceptual problem as
well.
We will come back to the committees once again with the
results of this and hope to have the release of the remaining
$60 million. This is all money that is already appropriated.
But we are moving ahead on the schedule that was established
with what is a very complex problem and with the end result of
which is going to be a distributed network of people who will
work together to preserve what is of lasting importance on the
Internet for future generations. The technical architecture
will be based on an agreed set of protocols, support metadata,
so that the content is preserved and secure. We will probably
be having a lot of conversation with the Congress about
possible legislation.
But this has been, I think, a very creative thing. It is
moving ahead very well. We have had wonderful cooperation. I
must say, the private sector has given a lot of help. There is
the implication that everyone will participate and pitch in
with something quite new, which is distributed responsibility
for our public national trust.
The other thing that is important, is that the Library has
unique experience. It is one of the reasons that I think they
all agree that the Library of Congress should play a central
role in this. We did not put them up to that, but they feel it
is extremely important. We did set the standards for cataloging
in the print world, so that all libraries could use it.
Cataloging is a continuing benefit to the whole library system
of America with the books and what we call analog artifactual
containers of knowledge and creativity.
Now in the new digital world, it is going to be much
tougher. But we still have the basic responsibility of working
with the National Institute of Standards and Technology and
Commerce and other Government agencies, and with the private
sector, to set standards that will be uniform, even though the
responsibility for executing it will be a distributive one.
VETERANS HISTORY PROJECT
Senator Campbell. Thank you. You are also requesting
approximately $1 million for the Veterans History Project,
which is something I think is really overdue and important.
That was created to collect taped and written accounts of war
veterans. I assume that means dead or alive going back
throughout history. The budget you have requested is about
double the current year's budget. Have you had any problems in
trying to implement that program?
Dr. Billington. I think there are no problems that a little
more help at the center of it would not mitigate, which is why
we have made this request. It has been an extraordinary
response.
Senator Campbell. How do you start cataloging them? Do you
go through the National Archives or the Department of Veterans
Affairs or something to find people to interview?
Dr. Billington. We have working arrangements with several
hundred national organizations and local organizations--all
kinds of partners that we work with. We are archiving the whole
business. They send in their accounts. We have sent out 100,000
instruction kits of how to prepare accounts and how to conduct
the interviews. We work through any local organization that
wants to partner with us. Forty-two of the 100 Senators have
set up projects in their own States and have specified people
that we can work with in their States or in their communities.
About one-third of the House of Representatives has done that
in their districts.
We have got a system whereby it is collected through the
Archive of American Folk Life, which now has permanent status
within the Library of Congress. They have some experience with
the overall history and the recording of accounts, because they
have recorded, as you probably know, some 10,000 wax disks
dating back to the 1890s with the Native Americans and 3,000
long-playing records on which so much of that oral history is
recorded.
Staff located in the Folklife Center are the people who are
archiving these histories. They deal with multiple formats. We
also accept diaries. Some people have moving testaments of
letters written during the war.
Senator Campbell. Do you work with tribes, too?
Dr. Billington. Yes, sir. We have some groups that we have
worked with, both in Seattle and in Nebraska, if I remember
correctly. Of course the famous Navajo Code Talkers have been
the absolute heroes of our last two national books festivals.
We are working with a wide variety of groups. We also work
with--let me make sure I get the name right here.
General Scott. I can fill you in on that.
Dr. Billington. General Scott, needless to say has been
intimately involved in overseeing this project.
General Scott. Yes, sir.
Dr. Billington. By the way, it is all wars, not just the
20th Century, that we are commemorating.
General Scott. Right. We do have one staff person who is
dedicated for outreach with various minorities in our country.
We do have several projects, and including one with a Native
American tribe that is located in or is associated with the
Oglala Lakota College on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation.
We are also working with the Soaring Eagle Foundation in
Seattle which also is involved with the Veterans History
Project. We also are working closely with the National Congress
of American Indians.
Our aim here is to not try to do all of the collecting of
the various stories ourselves, but to have as many partnerships
all across America as we possibly can. What we found is that in
certain regions of the country you have very strong veteran
service organizations. But we have also found that for many of
those veterans organizations minorities do not usually flock to
those organizations. That is why we have dedicated one of our
service members as minority outreach.
Senator Campbell. I might point out that they do not flock
to the larger, maybe the larger things, for instance, like the
VFW. Some of the minority groups might not join the downtown
VFW. But those VFW groups that are focused just on one ethnic
background or something like that----
General Scott. Yes, sir.
Senator Campbell [continuing]. They do join.
General Scott. Right.
Senator Campbell. The largest VFW, for instance, in
Montana, the largest VFW chapter is the Cheyenne Indian VFW. It
is larger than any of them, in Billings or any other cities. So
I guess it depends on how they feel, whether they identify with
other people that are already in it or something.
I might mention to you, too, that there is a man, Dr.
Herman Viola, and he used to be at the National Archives.
Dr. Billington. Oh, I know him very well.
Senator Campbell. He has written dozens of books. And he is
doing one now that I think ought to be really interesting that
you might tell your staff person about, that deals with Indian
veterans. You might want to contact Herman, because he is doing
one now on American Indian veterans going clear back to the
late 1800s. It is not out yet, but he has a lot of
documentation that might be interesting.
General Scott. Yes, sir, we will. We will follow up on
that.
Dr. Billington. That is very good. Actually, in the
percentage of veterans in wars, the minority percentage is
higher than the general population percentage. So this is a
very important frontier. It is another reason, frankly, that we
need a little more help at the center. We are not doing this
all. We are just getting the instructions out.
One of the best things about it is the intergenerational
quality. What is best is the various ways these interviews are
conducted that involve young people interacting with seniors.
The most moving is young people who discover things about their
great uncle they never knew he had experienced. It really is a
wonderful thing. It was unanimously endorsed by the Congress.
We got $3 million from the AARP when it started, although we
got very little initially.
We do feel now it has reached a stage where more support is
needed. We have about 75,000 of these accounts. But there are
19 million veterans; 1,500 die every day--we are racing against
time. We want to get these stories--many of the veterans have
never talked about their experiences. I can say, as a
historian, just looking at some of this stuff--and I have
conducted a few interviews myself--it is going to change the
writing of history, because we will now see wars from the
bottom up, rather than from just the top down.
Senator Campbell. I think it is a really important program.
Let me yield to Senator Durbin.
USE OF LIBRARY RESOURCES
Senator Durbin. Thank you, Senator. I apologize for being
late. We had an emergency meeting of the Illinois and Iowa
delegations over the future of an arsenal, and I wanted to be
certain that I made an appearance there.
But I am glad I could join you here today. Thank you and
thanks to Dr. Billington and General Scott for what you are
doing at the Library of Congress.
I would like to address an issue which is near and dear to
me that I have discussed with both of these gentlemen as
recently as yesterday. If you read the latest issue of Atlantic
Magazine, you may be surprised to learn, that Adolf Hitler was
not only a megalomaniac, but he was also a bibliophile and
collected a vast amount of books. When the Allied troops
liberated Germany, they took that collection and turned it over
to our friends at the Library of Congress. And across the
street now is Adolf Hitler's book collection with his
nameplates in the books.
Now the reason that that caught my attention was that I
never dreamed that he was a book collector.
Dr. Billington. He burned a lot of them.
Senator Durbin. Yes, he burned a lot. Nor did I know that--
--
Senator Campbell. He was an art collector, too, of sorts.
Senator Durbin [continuing]. His collection was across the
street at the Library of Congress, amid probably other
collections, but I think it is one of the major ones. We had a
conversation yesterday. We talked about all of the treasures
and assets of the Library of Congress that are virtually
unknown to the rest of the world. I think it is time that we
stopped hiding this light under a bushel. I think in order to
let the American people and the world know what we have, we
have to do a little better job of telling the story.
I think you do that. And I think websites are going to open
up a lot of access that just did not exist several years ago.
But there is another area that strikes me where we have great
potential. If you visit the National Gallery or any of the
Smithsonians or any of the museums, major museums, in any city
in this country, you will find great collections of wonderful
things and a great gift store that allows you, in leaving with
that positive feeling about this institution, to take home
something that caught your eye, a reproduction of a work of art
or something that you want to treasure yourself and share with
your family.
I think we can do more with the Library of Congress in this
regard. I think there is an opportunity to take some of the
more outstanding things in the collection of the Library of
Congress and safely reproduce them in a form that will generate
revenue for the Library, to be reinvested in its activities and
also give the American people a better opportunity to
understand what a great treasure we have in the Library of
Congress.
And I might add, Mr. Chairman, this committee is really on
the front line of this. In the not-too-distant future, maybe 2
years, we will have a Capitol Visitor Center. Within that
Capitol Visitor Center, we will find millions of people
accessing the United States Capitol again under the best
circumstances, in a secure way, so that there is no doubt about
their security or the security of the building.
RETAIL SALES ACTIVITIES
Attached to that Capitol Visitor Center will be tunnel
access to the Library of Congress. So these same hundreds of
thousands of visitors will have a chance to make a turn in
their visit to Washington and come over to see the Library of
Congress, many for the first time. I think that, too, is going
to be another opportunity for access to the Library and access
to perhaps some retail operation where they can leave the
Library with something that means a lot to them.
I have not even touched on E-commerce, which I think I
would like to ask you about, if I could. I have talked to some
people. And they said, for example, if you took some of the
extraordinarily rare maps in the Library of Congress and
produce them in limited edition for sale, with the revenue
coming back to the Library, there would be a lot of people
interested in it.
Tell me what you have done so far--we have talked about
this for a year or two--and what you envision the next step to
be in this process.
Dr. Billington. Well, I will just say one word, because
General Scott has been overseeing this. We have moved, and
largely in response to your very effective and helpful
suggestions, and done a test of online marketing. After 9/11,
we had to close our Madison shop. We now have one in the
Jefferson. It is small. We will certainly want to look into the
idea of expanding it, as you suggest.
But on the question of E-commerce, since we are a huge web
presence as it is, this is very clearly promising. And the
experiments that General Scott supervised this past year have
shown real promise with that. But I will let him tell the
story, because he has been doing a good job for it, moving us
into a more aggressive business posture, as you have suggested.
General Scott. Yes, sir. The first thing we have done is we
have made some real progress towards making some profits on
some of the items that we have marketed, particularly on the
website. During last year, we marketed some of the gift shop
items through Yahoo. And for a very modest investment, because
we did not have additional money to really go out and hire
somebody, we were able to make $73,000, which really came out
to be about a 24 percent return on the investment.
With that, we have also come out with a business strategy
and an implementation plan that we feel confident that if we
could have some seed money--that is what we have asked for in
this budget--we could make this a much more profitable
operation.
We did talk about a map, putting one of the rare maps up. I
am pleased to say that Beacher Wiggins, who is our Acting
Director for Library Services now, has started already to
research that project. We are going to see where that is going
to take us. I do think we have put together a plan that
identifies what we need to do between now and the next couple
of years. If we can get this seed money, I think we will be
able to come back and tell you our progress next year.
Senator Campbell. Is this the plan that the Congress
directed in the fiscal year 2003 to----
General Scott. Yes, sir.
Senator Campbell. And in your request this year, as I
understand it, you are requesting $715,000, 5 FTEs, and that it
will be the seed money to----
General Scott. Yes, sir.
Senator Campbell [continuing]. Do the infrastructure and
the marketing and so on?
General Scott. That is correct, sir. It is just a 1-year
request that we are asking for.
Senator Campbell. And you had a 23 percent----
General Scott. We had a 24 percent return on investment.
Senator Durbin. I want to just say, Mr. Chairman, I will
not dwell on it any longer since I came in late, but I think we
want to take care that we maintain our first responsibilities.
You have a fiduciary responsibility to the contents of the
Library of Congress. We all do as part of this effort, and that
has to be protected.
We certainly do not want to see commercial exploitation of
things that are very sensitive and important. We want to take
care that we pick those items that can be merchandised in a
tasteful and thoughtful and responsible way. And I trust that
is exactly what you are going to do.
There have been some controversies in some agencies of
government about commercialization. We are not going to get
close to those. I think there are things that we can share with
the American people and, with the revenue from that, enhance
your great institution.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Campbell. Let me add, too, though, I mean, some
things you will market. But I have visited the Library a number
of times. And I have traveled a lot, like Senator Durbin has. I
have been to the Roman baths in Rome, for instance, and some of
the great cathedrals in St. Petersburg. And I have to tell you
that the mosaics on the floor of the Roman baths and the
mosaics in the cathedrals of St. Petersburg I do not think are
any nicer than the ones you have in this building.
And it would seem to me that part of the marketing ought to
be to get people to come and see the things that you are not
going to be able to send them as a souvenir. And, I would
commend that. In fact, I do all the time. People come into our
office and ask us, ``We only have half a day. What do you think
we ought to see around here besides the Capitol?'' I always
recommend the Library of Congress, specifically because of
those outstanding mosaics that are on the wall.
So, from that standpoint, I do not really see that as
commercialization. That is something they own, as American
citizens and taxpayers. And it is certainly an educational
experience for youngsters. And I think a lot could be done with
that, if you want to increase the tourism over there.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Well, I have two or three other questions. What I am going
to do, since I do have another meeting, however, is submit
those to you and ask you if you would get back to us to put on
the record in writing.
General Scott. Yes, sir.
Dr. Billington. Yes, sir.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Library for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell
POLICE REQUEST
Question. The Library has approximately 130 police officers, which
are to be merged with the U.S. Capitol Police over the next few years.
The Library is requesting an additional 51 officers in its fiscal year
2004 budget. Why are these officers needed now? Have you asked the
Capitol Police to undertake a postings study for these additional
officers? How will you ensure bringing in these officers at this time
will not negatively impact the impending merger?
Answer. The Library plans to open or expand ten new police posts in
fiscal year 2004 in connection with the completion of 1999 supplemental
appropriations perimeter security construction. Additionally, some of
the requested FTEs would be used to bring current police posts to the
minimum staffing level to ensure officer and staff safety. The Capitol
Police have not been asked to conduct a postings study for the
additional Library police officers. However, the Library has completed
a comprehensive post staffing analysis supporting this request. The
Library does not believe that bringing on the requested new officers
would negatively impact an impending police merger. These additional
FTEs would be needed under the current or a merged structure, as the
requirements remain the same.
HIRING PROBLEMS
Question. In 2001 the Library installed a new automated hiring
system that was required by Court order. You reported in last year's
hearing that it was resulting in some significant delays in hiring
personnel with unqualified people getting through the initial screening
process. What is the status of this system and will the Library be able
to hire up to the level the Congress authorized for fiscal year 2003?
What is the average amount of time required to hire a new person, and
what accounts for the improvement over last year?
Answer. After various systems and process improvements, the Library
is hiring quicker and in higher numbers than ever before. On average,
fiscal year 2002 selections occurred 110 calendar days after postings
opened, as compared to 178 calendar days under the previous hiring
process. The Library achieved this savings largely by reducing
processing time within Human Resources Services. The Library also made
300 selections in fiscal year 2002, a notable improvement over the
previous 190-selection average. The Library is working hard to meet the
fiscal year 2003 hiring requirements, despite working under eight
continuing resolutions for almost 6 months of the fiscal year, which
always impacts hiring.
CRS--HIRING PROBLEMS
Question. Last year Congressional Research Service (CRS) identified
some areas where it needed to increase its staffing--homeland security
and terrorism, and aging-related issues. Have you been able to hire-up
or otherwise fill the need you identified in these areas?
Answer. Of the twelve new positions approved for fiscal year 2003,
five positions were posted by March 31, 2003: (1) Public Health &
Epidemiology--Combating Terrorism; (2) Infrastructure Systems
Analysis--Combating Terrorism; (3) Science & Technology, Biochemistry--
Combating Terrorism; (4) Economics of Aging--Aging; and (5) Economics
of Health Care--Aging.
Another six positions will be posted by early June 2003: (1)
Islamic and Arabic Affairs--Terrorism; (2) Actuary--Aging; (3) Senior
Demographer--Aging; (4) Bio-ethical Policy--Aging; (5) Genetics--Aging;
and (6) Gerontology--Aging.
The projected on-board dates for the four positions supporting
Combating Terrorism, that have already been posted, vary from July
through September. The last Combating Terrorism position, a Librarian,
will be posted in fiscal year 2004. The projected on-board dates for
the seven Aging positions begin in August 2003, with the final two
reporting in October 2003.
DIGITAL INITIATIVES
Question. The Library has a National Digital Library program with
funding of about $20 million. Through this program the Library has
digitized many parts of its collection and made them available through
the Library's web site. In addition, the Library is shepherding a
multi-agency, government/industry effort called the National Digital
Information Infrastructure Preservation Program (NDIIPP). How do these
two programs relate to one another? The Library recently received this
Committee's approval to proceed with spending $25 million of the $100
million appropriated for NDIIPP. What is the status of this effort? The
next step will be securing matching funds from other organizations,
totaling $75 million. Have you begun this process? Do you envision the
need for significant additional appropriations in the next few years
for digital initiatives or to implement the NDIIPP?
Answer. Through the Library's efforts to build a digital library,
The National Digital Library (NDL) program, the Library learned how to
convert analog materials and deliver content electronically. Building
upon the know-how gained in developing a digital library and handling
digital materials, the NDIIPP's goal is to develop a national strategy
for collecting and preserving digital content. The NDIIPP program is a
special program to develop a national strategy to collect and preserve
current digital content that only exist in ``born digital'' form.
NDIIPP is funded by a special appropriation, whereas, the NDL is an
ongoing part of the Library's budget base.
The NDIIPP plan was accepted by Congress on December 3, 2002. The
next phase of the NDIIPP plan has two major components: a network of
cooperating institutions and partners, and the technical framework,
communication networks, services, and applications that support the
cooperating network of partners.
The plan envisages a three-tiered research and investment program
which suggests targeted core capacity investments that will be subject
to matching funds in pilot projects and experiments that will run for 1
to 5 years, beginning in fiscal year 2003. ``Core capacities'' refer to
the shared knowledge, expertise skills, and consensus deemed essential
to support collaborations among partners that comprise the digital
preservation network.
The Library does not envision the need for appropriations support
in the next few years for the NDIIPP beyond the $100 million Congress
has already appropriated for NDIIPP.
The Library is in the process of updating its internal digital
initiative strategy. This includes identifying the need for any
additional NDL appropriated base funding support for fiscal year 2005
and beyond.
CRS CONTRACTING
Question. CRS' budget includes a $3 million increase for
contracts--roughly 40 percent over the current year. Yet according to
the Inspector General, in many instances CRS' consulting contracts are
not cost effective and do not comply with regulations. The IG found at
CRS consistent trends of limited or no competition, insufficient cost
analysis and inadequate sole source justifications. Why should we
provide this increase in view of these problems, and have these
deficiencies been fixed?
Answer. Per the Library's Inspector General (IG), the information
driving the question about the CRS contracting may have been taken out
of context. The majority of the audit conditions and recommendations
were focused on the Library's Contract Services, not the CRS. Two of
the three contracting issues addressed in the Senate question,
competition and inadequate sole source justifications apply exclusively
to the Library's Contract Services functions. The remaining issue,
which relates to insufficient cost analysis, pertains to and has been
partially corrected by CRS through training of the CRS contract
specialist.
The IG recognizes the absence of viable alternatives or competitors
with regard to the highly specialized, interim research or analytic
capacity for which CRS typically contracts under its statutory, non-
competitive authority. The CRS non-competitive research capacity
contracts are generally short-term and low dollar value contracts;
therefore, performing extensive cost analysis on every individual
contract would create an administrative burden and cost that could
potentially exceed any savings. However, in following the spirit of the
recommendation, CRS has consulted with the IG regarding the pricing of
two unusual contracts--one contract was with a medical research
corporation that included a sizable overhead fee, and the other
contract was with an individual who cited a previously approved rate
determination by an IG from another federal agency. The IG supported
the CRS pricing concerns and we were able to achieve some savings on
both contracts as a result.
CRS has agreed to include cost reviews--where appropriate--in their
updated contract policy guidelines, which will satisfy the audit
recommendation.
The CRS budget request included a $2.7 million increase in
contracts; however, $1 million of that request was subsequently
approved under the fiscal year 2003 supplemental. Of the $1.7 million
remaining, nearly all of it is for contract staff who will support the
CRS technology infrastructure for research and the creation and
dissemination of CRS products. CRS will acquire these services through
one of the existing General Service Administration (GSA) pre-competed
contract vehicles--most likely Federal Systems Integration and
Management Center (FEDSIM). The remaining $18,000 is for training
contracts, which will be acquired competitively.
REMOTE ACCESS TO CRS MATERIAL
Question. What is CRS doing to enable members of Congress and staff
to access CRS from remote locations (e.g. traveling abroad)? What are
the costs involved with making this possible?
Answer. The Senate Sergeant-At-Arms provides members and staff with
the means for connecting remotely to the Senate network. Once connected
to that network, members and staff have secure access to the entire CRS
Web site and to CRS staff through the Senate email system. Over the
last several years, CRS has put significant effort into ensuring that
its Web site offers the full range of CRS services, including access to
all CRS products arranged by issue area or by user search-term, and the
names, phone numbers, and email addresses of CRS experts in specific
issue areas. From the CRS Web site, members and staff can also place
requests, register for CRS seminars, and access CRS reference services.
BOOKS FOR THE BLIND AND PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED
Question. Last year the National Library Service for the Blind and
Physically Handicapped was planning to convert to digital format in
lieu of cassette tape, the books and materials it provides to the blind
community. With an inventory of more than 700,000 cassette tape
machines, this will be very expensive. How much will you need and when
will you request additional funds?
Answer. The National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
Handicapped projects that a total of approximately $75 million will be
required to fund the transition from analog cassette to a digital
format over a period of at least 5 years. An initial request will be
submitted in fiscal year 2005.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Campbell. With that, thank you so much for this
material you brought me. I certainly do appreciate it. And I
will read that 100-year anniversary of Harley-Davidson with
great interest.
This subcommittee is recessed.
[Whereupon, at 2:23 p.m., Thursday, April 10, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]